DeLay must stand trial on Felony Money Laundering Charges

[jAZ]

... but avoided the conspiracy charge on a technicality - conspiracy laws didn't apply to the election code until shortly after his actions. Note that what he did is illegal today, but legally it appears that charge should be dropped.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/3504045.html

Dec. 5, 2005, 5:03PM
DeLay's hopes dashed for quick end to case
Judge dismisses one felony indictment but upholds another

By R.G. RATCLIFFE
Copyright 2005 Houston Chronicle Austin Bureau

AUSTIN - A senior district judge today dismissed one felony indictment but upheld another against U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay, dashing DeLay's hopes for a speedy resolution to his case.

A quick ruling in DeLay's favor from senior state District Judge Pat Priest throwing the case out of court was crucial to the Sugar Land Republican's efforts to regain his post as U.S. House majority leader. He was forced to step down when he was indicted in September.

Priest dismissed charges of conspiracy to violate the state election code but upheld a money laundering indictment against DeLay and two of his associates: Jim Ellis and John Colyandro. They were charged in connection with spending corporate money in the 2002 legislative races.

DeLay spokesman Kevin Madden portrayed the ruling as a major legal victory over Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle.

"The court's decision to dismiss a portion of Ronnie Earle's manufactured and flawed case against Mr. DeLay underscores just how baseless and politically motivated the charges were,'' Madden said.

"Mr. DeLay is very encouraged by the swift progress of the legal proceedings and looks forward to his eventual and absolute exoneration based on the facts and the law," Madden said.

Priest had told DeLay's lawyers last month that if he upheld either of the indictments, he would be unable to hold a trial for DeLay before early next year.

House Republicans have indicated they wanted to hold a leadership election in January if DeLay was not cleared by then.

Indictments returned in September and October accuse DeLay, Colyandro and Ellis of being involved in a scheme to flow allegedly illegal corporate money into 2002 Texas House races. The money laundering charges accuse them of running $190,000 in illegal corporate funds through the Republican National Committee.

Lawyers for the three argued that it was legal for the DeLay-founded Texans for a Republican Majority to raise corporate money so long as the money was not donated to candidates. They said there was no trade of funds with the Republican National Committee.

DeLay's legal team, headed by Dick DeGuerin of Houston, had challenged the indictments on numerous legal issues, but DeGuerin called two the ''silver bullets.''

Those points were that the state conspiracy law did not apply to the election code until a year after the 2002 elections.

The other was that the definition of money laundering did not include checks until 2005. TRMPAC transferred the $190,000 in corporate money to the RNC by using a check.

Earle brought the case against Delay as the statute of limitations was running out on 2002 election code violations. The indictments brought a wild legal ride.

After Earle learned there might be ''technical'' problems with a Sept. 28 indictment on conspiracy to violate the election code, he went to a second grand jury to seek the money laundering charges. The first grand jury had expired, and the second grand jury returned a no bill.

Then on Oct. 3, Earle asked a newly impaneled grand jury to indict Delay, Colyandro and Ellis on money laundering charges, and it did.

DeGuerin had asked to have the indictments dismissed because of prosecutorial misconduct. Priest said he would hear that motion only if he upheld the indictments against the legal challenges.

Besides the squabble over the legal issues, there also was a judge merry-go-round.

DeGuerin asked to have the original judge in the case, District Judge Bob Perkins of Austin, removed because he had made political donations to national organizations opposed to DeLay. After a hearing, Senior Judge C.W. ''Bud'' Duncan removed Perkins from the case.

Earle then got administrative Judge B.B. Straub of Seguin to remove himself from assigning a new judge to the case because he had made Republican political donations that could appear to favor DeLay.

Assigning the case then fell to Texas Supreme Court Chief Justice Wallace Jefferson. In the 2002 elections, Jefferson campaigned for House candidates in events organized by TRMPAC.

Jefferson refused Earle's request to recuse himself from making the appointment. Jefferson named Priest, a Democrat, to try DeLay's case.

[patteeu]

When you talk about Delay getting off on a "technicality" and go on about how what he did *would* be a crime if he did it today, it almost makes it sound like he got away with doing something wrong. But the truth is that, if there wasn't a law against it then, the alleged act was legal. That's not a technicality.

[recxjake]

hmm good news for him, I still think the whole thing is politcally motivated and should be dropped

[jAZ]

When you talk about Delay getting off on a "technicality" and go on about how what he did *would* be a crime if he did it today, it almost makes it sound like he got away with doing something wrong. But the truth is that, if there wasn't a law against it then, the alleged act was legal. That's not a technicality.
Oh, lets at least agree that there is a difference between "illegal" and ""wrong". Not all wrong things are illegal. It was made illegal (from the sounds of it within weeks or months). If it were "right" and not "wrong", it wouldn't have been made illegal as it was shortly after the election.

All that said... it sounds as if the conspiracy charge was one that was not illegal, and as such it seems it was properly dismissed.

[jAZ]

hmm good news for him, I still think the whole thing is politcally motivated and should be dropped
Seems as though the Judge (who looked at the law and went so far as to drop 1/2 the charges) thinks you are full of it. He seems to think that there is reasonable merit to to the charges and not just "politically motivated". He obviously doesn't think it should be dropped either.

You think maybe you are just buying into what the RW spin is feeding you?

[patteeu]

Oh, lets at least agree that there is a difference between "illegal" and ""wrong". Not all wrong things are illegal. It was made illegal (from the sounds of it within weeks or months). If it were "right" and not "wrong", it wouldn't have been made illegal as it was shortly after the election.

All that said... it sounds as if the conspiracy charge was one that was not illegal, and as such it seems it was properly dismissed.

I agree. Legal and wrong are two different things. Sometimes something can be legal and wrong. Sometimes they can be illegal without being wrong.

But that doesn't apply here. We are talking about fund raising rules not about a moral issue. The rightness or wrongness of an action in political fund raising is based on the rules. There is nothing inherently wrong with a wide receiver making a cut toward the line of scrimmage before the ball is snapped. It is only wrong because it is against the rules. It wasn't wrong before the rule was created.

[recxjake]

Seems as though the Judge (who looked at the law and went so far as to drop 1/2 the charges) thinks you are full of it. He seems to think that there is reasonable merit to to the charges and not just "politically motivated". He obviously doesn't think it should be dropped either.

You think maybe you are just buying into what the RW spin is feeding you?

wanna put a bet on if he is convicted?

[Boozer]

I agree. Legal and wrong are two different things. Sometimes something can be legal and wrong. Sometimes they can be illegal without being wrong.

But that doesn't apply here. We are talking about fund raising rules not about a moral issue. The rightness or wrongness of an action in political fund raising is based on the rules. There is nothing inherently wrong with a wide receiver making a cut toward the line of scrimmage before the ball is snapped. It is only wrong because it is against the rules. It wasn't wrong before the rule was created.

To the extent campaign finance rules are enforcing a morality of "fairness in elections,"* breaking those rules also runs afoul of that morality.

*The morality being enforced, of course, is just one among many. Ditto with regards to the concept of "fairness in elections." This post does not mean to endorse either one.

[Cochise]

So does this mean Thomas Jefferson "got off on a technicality" re: the laundry list of charges he would get today for owning slaves back in the 1700s? Slavery is illegal today, after all.

[jAZ]

wanna put a bet on if he is convicted?
How would this prove the charges were merely "poltically motivated". Aren't there about a dozen different ways someone can get off on charges and still almost certainly have commited the acts?

Or have you never heard of Orenthal James Simpson?

[jAZ]

I agree. Legal and wrong are two different things. Sometimes something can be legal and wrong. Sometimes they can be illegal without being wrong.

But that doesn't apply here. We are talking about fund raising rules not about a moral issue. The rightness or wrongness of an action in political fund raising is based on the rules. There is nothing inherently wrong with a wide receiver making a cut toward the line of scrimmage before the ball is snapped. It is only wrong because it is against the rules. It wasn't wrong before the rule was created.
Hogwash, DeLay was trying to gain an election advantage for his party that their stance on the issues alone would allow them to achieve. That's certainly wrong, in my book.

He was also trying to get around fundraising rules that are in place to protect the majority of people from the undue influence of a very wealthy/powerful minority.

This whole DeLay thing is wroght with issues of ethics, morality, right-wrong and the like.

[recxjake]

How would this prove the charges were merely "poltically motivated". Aren't there about a dozen different ways someone can get off on charges and still almost certainly have commited the acts?

Or have you never heard of Orenthal James Simpson?

oh i was just talking about if he was going to be found guilty or not.................but yes this is politcally motivated.... that scuz ball prosecutor has always wanted to nail Delay........ it's not an excuse, just a fact

[patteeu]

To the extent campaign finance rules are enforcing a morality of "fairness in elections,"* breaking those rules also runs afoul of that morality.

*The morality being enforced, of course, is just one among many. Ditto with regards to the concept of "fairness in elections." This post does not mean to endorse either one.

The point I was trying to make is that there is no agreed upon moral line involved that is independent of the rule itself. The rule represents the current consensus on the morality of the situation when it comes to campaign finance. jAZ may have his own standard for political money decency, but Tom Delay shouldn't be held to it. Tom Delay should be held to the standard of the law. jAZ wants to argue that even if Tom Delay is acquitted (or alternatively if the charges are dropped), he is still "wrong."

[patteeu]

Hogwash, DeLay was trying to gain an election advantage for his party that their stance on the issues alone would allow them to achieve. That's certainly wrong, in my book.

He was also trying to get around fundraising rules that are in place to protect the majority of people from the undue influence of a very wealthy/powerful minority.

This whole DeLay thing is wroght with issues of ethics, morality, right-wrong and the like.

Trying to gain an election advantage within the rules is not immoral. Trying to avoid breaking the law is not immoral.

[jAZ]

Trying to gain an election advantage within the rules is not immoral.
It certainly can be as it was in this case.

[CRONUS]

When you talk about Delay getting off on a "technicality" and go on about how what he did *would* be a crime if he did it today, it almost makes it sound like he got away with doing something wrong. But the truth is that, if there wasn't a law against it then, the alleged act was legal. That's not a technicality.Point to patteau on this one.

[Rausch]

Uh, if the money didn't come from an illegal source, by definiton, it can't be money laundering.

If he did get the money through illegal means castrate the bastard, crucify him, and be done with it...

[Ugly Duck]

hmm good news for himI admire your "half full glass" outlook. If one of my boyz just had a money laundering charge upheld by a judge, I'd consider it to be bad news. The judge just said your boy will have to stand trial, and thus he will remain out of the majority leader position. You see that as a victory.... kudos to you!

[patteeu]

It certainly can be as it was in this case.

You are entitled to your minority, fringe opinion.

[Cochise]

It certainly can be as it was in this case.

Please, don't force your own personal standard of morality on the rest of the world. :Poke:

[Radar Chief]

I admire your "half full glass" outlook. If one of my boyz just had a money laundering charge upheld by a judge, I'd consider it to be bad news. The judge just said your boy will have to stand trial, and thus he will remain out of the majority leader position. You see that as a victory.... kudos to you!

Glad to see you admit this is just a political ploy. :thumb:

[recxjake]

I admire your "half full glass" outlook. If one of my boyz just had a money laundering charge upheld by a judge, I'd consider it to be bad news. The judge just said your boy will have to stand trial, and thus he will remain out of the majority leader position. You see that as a victory.... kudos to you!

this is definetly great news for him..... he's going to win anyway.... absolutly no case

[jAZ]

that scuz ball prosecutor has always wanted to nail Delay........ it's not an excuse, just a fact
.... absolutly no case
Do you ever wonder why you are the only one here litterally acting like a cheerleader. The rest of us have strong opinions too, but no one buy you says things like the above. And especially not when a judge just bitch-slapped DeLay by essentially saying (at least superficially) that there is absoultely a case.

Now either you know something about this trial that the judge himself doesn't know, or you are acting like Tiffany the little 16 year old cheerleader right before the big game... "It's a FACT, we're gonna win, no doubt!"

Go Team!

[NewPhin]

Do you ever wonder why you are the only one here litterally acting like a cheerleader. The rest of us have strong opinions too, but no one buy you says things like the above. And especially not when a judge just bitch-slapped DeLay by essentially saying (at least superficially) that there is absoultely a case.

Now either you know something about this trial that the judge himself doesn't know, or you are acting like Tiffany the little 16 year old cheerleader right before the big game... "It's a FACT, we're gonna win, no doubt!"

Go Team!

What you're missing is that spewsmax said there was no case, so there's no case.

[jAZ]

You are entitled to your minority, fringe opinion.
Do you wonder how my "minority, fringe opinion" became the law of the land in Texas? I know I spent the night there on road trips before, but I didn't know how powerful I really was.

[jAZ]

Please, don't force your own personal standard of morality on the rest of the world. :Poke:
I'm sorry I didn't realize the Texas legislature would agree with me before I ever uttered the words. I've gotta watch myself... my powers are more immense than I ever even knew. [buttons shirt closed hiding Superman]

[Ugly Duck]

Glad to see you admit this is just a political ploy. :thumb:Now, now.... saying that the Republican majority leader being held out of his position as he stands trial for money laundering not a victory for the Party is not the same thing as "admiting its a polical ploy." Its just a statement of fact. There's a long, long, LONG list of Republicans in legal trouble. The cabal won't be able to protect all of them from being brought to justice.

[Cochise]

Now, now.... saying that the Republican majority leader being held out of his position as he stands trial for money laundering not a victory for the Party is not the same thing as "admiting its a polical ploy." Its just a statement of fact. There's a long, long, LONG list of Republicans in legal trouble. The cabal won't be able to protect all of them from being brought to justice.

I didn't realize it until this story, but you're right, all the Republicans are felons, and all the Democrats are angels. Practically every Republican in congress is doing something evil. It's really quite amazing how all the perfect angels got put on the left side of the aisle, but hey, that's just the way it played out.

[NewPhin]

I didn't realize it until this story, but you're right, all the Republicans are felons, and all the Democrats are angels. Practically every Republican in congress is doing something evil. It's really quite amazing how all the perfect angels got put on the left side of the aisle, but hey, that's just the way it played out.

Democrats are angels. Baby-eating, tree-hugging, god-hating, gay-loving, freeloading, drug-using, angels. But angels nonetheless.

[recxjake]

Democrats are angels. Baby-eating, tree-hugging, god-hating, gay-loving, freeloading, drug-using, angels. But angels nonetheless.

no just evil

[Boozer]

I didn't realize it until this story, but you're right, all the Republicans are felons, and all the Democrats are angels. Practically every Republican in congress is doing something evil. It's really quite amazing how all the perfect angels got put on the left side of the aisle, but hey, that's just the way it played out.

Whoa, a Cochise sighting here in D.C.! This is like seeing an AA regular in a bar. What's the matter, did Phil take your double-secret probation special group status with him when he left to run the other board?

[Cochise]

Whoa, a Cochise sighting here in D.C.! This is like seeing an AA regular in a bar. What's the matter, did Phil take your double-secret probation special group status with him when he left to run the other board?

Nah I PMed him and asked to be removed from the group. My vacation went pretty well, thanks :)

[Boozer]

Nah I PMed him and asked to be removed from the group. My vacation went pretty well, thanks :)

http://www.epath.org/blog/uploaded_images/alcoholic-766131.jpg
Welcome back, fallen angel.

[Cochise]

I can quit anytime I want to!

[Ugly Duck]

I didn't realize it until this story, but you're right, all the Republicans are felons, and all the Democrats are angels. Practically every Republican in congress is doing something evil. It's really quite amazing how all the perfect angels got put on the left side of the aisle, but hey, that's just the way it played out.

I didn't realize it until this story, but you're right, all the Republicans are felons, and all the Democrats are angels. Practically every Republican in congress is doing something evil. It's really quite amazing how all the perfect angels got put on the left side of the aisle, but hey, that's just the way it played out.Nice try, but this has gone way beyond the "Uhhhh... maybe some Dems are dirty, too!" defense. In spite of the heavy-handed One Party Control dragging its feet on investigating itself for so long, investigations are springing up from different souces, different directions, and finally, from within. Charges of lying and corruption and bribery and election violations. skimming money from defense contractors in time of war. Against so many Republicans. And the Republican-voting drones chant the same defense for all....

"Scanlon is innocent! Its an anti-Republican political witchunt!" Scanlon pleads guilty...

"Bob Taft is innocent! Its an anti-Republican political witchunt!" Taft pleads guilty...

"Duke Cunningham is innocent! Its an anti-Republican political witchunt!" Duke pleads guilty...

"Flanigan is innocent! Its an anti-Republican political witchunt!" Flanigan pleads guilty...

"Tom DeLay is innocent! Its an anti-Republican political witchunt!"........

"Bill Frist is innocent! Its an anti-Republican political witchunt!"........

"Jack Abramoff is innocent! Its an anti-Republican political witchunt!"........

"Safavian is innocent! Its an anti-Republican political witchunt!"........

"Ernie Fletcher is innocent! Its an anti-Republican political witchunt!"........

"George Ryan is innocent! Its an anti-Republican political witchunt!"........

"Scooter is innocent! Its an anti-Republican political witchunt!"........