"The grand jury will continue its work, abiding by the rule of law. That law requires a grand jury of citizens, not the prosecutor, to determine whether probable cause exists to hold an accused person to answer for the accusation against him or her."As said before, a jury of 6 or 12 citizens made the determination to bring an indictment.
"one of the week's most-talked-about events may be a $30,000 martini and cigar night honoring Rep. David Dreier . . . The invitation came in a cigar box, and the party favors will include silver-plated martini glasses.
"It may not be politically correct, but it is very chic," said Brad Smith, Dreier's chief of staff."
"After earlier reporting that Rep. David Dreier (R-CA) was expected to succeed House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-TX) as majority leader, the decision has been reversed. House Majority Whip Roy Blunt (D-MO) will instead take up DeLay's post.posted by ericb at 1:38 PM on September 28, 2005
Sources tell RAW STORY that Dreier -- who was a shoo-in for the position -- was nixed for various reasons, in part because his sexuality would raise ire within the party ranks. He is also out of favor because he is pro-choice.
A second reason cited is that it would have meant that Doc Hastings (R-FL) would have become Rules Chairman in Dreier's place, meaning the Ethics Committee would change hands midstream. This was seen by leadership as a bad move, sources say."
"The 52-year-old single congressman voted for the Marriage Protection Act in July, a measure that would have stripped federal courts of jurisdiction over challenges to the Defense of Marriage Act, which bans the federal government from recognizing gay partnerships. Dreier did not vote on the latest amendment to constitutionally ban gay marriage, and said he was against it.posted by ericb at 1:40 PM on September 28, 2005
Dreier, a Christian Scientist, also voted for the original Defense of Marriage Act in 1996 and a measure that banned gays from adopting in Washington, D.C. He has a 92 percent favorability rating from the Christian Coalition, and was elected with Ronald Reagan in 1980.
Hustler sent Dreier a letter Sept. 7 asking to interview him about the 'intersection of human sexuality, national politics and the conservative agenda.' They have not received a response.
When asked if he was heterosexual on a Sirus Radio interview Aug. 31, Rep. Dreier refused to answer.
“I’m not going to talk about that issue,” Dreier said. 'That’s really not what I’m here about.'"
"Earle has spent almost three years investigating whether Republican groups and their business allies violated the ban on spending corporate money in connection with political campaigns. The groups helped elect a Republican majority to the state Legislature which, in turn, drew new Congressional districts that benefited Republican candidates.posted by ericb at 1:48 PM on September 28, 2005
Over the past year, Travis County grand jurors have indicted three DeLay associates — John Colyandro, Jim Ellis and Warren Robold — as well as eight corporate donors, the Texas Association of Business and DeLay's Texans for a Republican Majority. Colyandro and Ellis were re-indicted this morning as part of the conspiracy indictment.
DeLay had appeared to escape criminal scrutiny as early as last year when Travis County prosecutors concluded they did not have the jurisdiction to pursue election code violations against him. Under the law, only DeLay's local district attorney, a Republican, had jurisdiction, and he expressed no interest in the case.
But a conspiracy charge falls under the criminal code, not the election statute that bans corporate money from being spent on a campaign. And Earle has the jurisdiction to prosecute DeLay for conspiring with others to circumvent state law.
In recent days, the broad-based investigation has focused on one particular transaction during the 2002 campaign.
In late September 2002, Colyandro, the executive director of Texans for a Republican Majority, sent a blank check to Ellis, who is DeLay's primary fundraiser in Washington.
According to the money-laundering indictment returned against those two last year, Ellis was accused of having the Republican National Committee launder $190,000 of corporate donations into noncorporate money that was sent to to seven Texas House candidates, including Austinites Jack Stick and Todd Baxter." [Austin American Statesman | September 28, 2005]
"A grand jury can compel witnesses to testify. During the proceeding, the defendant and his or her counsel are generally not present. The grand jury's decision is either "true bill" or "no true bill." Where they exist, grand juries are part of the system of checks and balances that prevents a case from going to trial without an impartial panel of citizens first deciding whether there exists reasonable cause or probable cause to believe that a crime has been committed.Thus, it appears that since this is a federal charge of wrongdoing, a 'grand jury' is required to determine if there is cause enough to make an indictment. It's now obvious that this jury felt there is reasonable or probable cause that a crime was committed.
Britain abandoned grand juries in the 1930s, and today fewer than half of the states in the U.S. employ them. Most jurisdictions have abolished grand juries, replacing them with the preliminary hearing at which a judge hears evidence concerning the alleged offenses and makes a decision on whether the prosecution can proceed. However, grand juries are still used in a number of US jurisdictions.
...Charges involving 'capital or infamous crimes' under federal jurisdiction must be presented to a grand jury, under the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution. This has been interpreted to permit bypass of the grand jury for misdemeanor offenses, which can be charged by prosecutor's information.
Unlike many other provisions of the Bill of Rights, the Supreme Court has ruled that this requirement does not pertain to the state courts, and states are therefore free to abolish grand juries." [source]
DeLay is acting as if this is a battle he can still win, declaring his intention to step aside only temporarily in order to exonerate himself. But the timing could hardly be worse for him. A very public rift between DeLay and fiscal hawks led by Indiana Rep. Mike Pence over how to finance Katrina reconstruction had left DeLay's erstwhile conservative base on the Hill angry and rebellious. . . House Speaker Dennis Hastert found out just how deep that unease ran when he attempted to name a temporary replacement, chairman of the Rules Committee and leadership player David Dreier. Party conservatives rebelled over Dreier's moderate positions on gay marriage, stem cells and other issues, forcing Hastert to roll out a compromise power sharing arrangement between Dreier and the GOP whip, Roy Blunt of Missouri."That’s TRMPAC. That’s not me…I was simply, along with four other elected officials, on an advisory board. They used my name as headliners for fundraisers and I had no idea what they were doing."Not looking good at first glance, Tommy.
"The political committee of Rep. Roy Blunt, who is temporarily replacing Rep. Tom DeLay as House majority leader, has paid roughly $88,000 in fees since 2003 to a consultant under indictment in Texas with DeLay, according to federal records.posted by ericb at 9:10 PM on September 28, 2005
Keri Ann Hayes, executive director of the Rely on Your Beliefs Fund, said the organization has been satisfied with the work done by Jim Ellis, but has not discussed whether he will be retained.
'We haven't had that conversation,' she said. So far, she added, Ellis' indictment had no impact on his work.'
Records on file with the Federal Election Commission show the fund linked to Blunt retains Ellis' firm, J.W. Ellis Co., and has made periodic payments for services. Political Money Line, a nonpartisan Internet tracking service, places the total at about $88,000.
Ellis is one of three political associates of DeLay, R-Texas, who have been indicted in an alleged scheme to use corporate political donations illegally to support candidates in state elections. Ellis also runs DeLay's national political action committee, Americans for a Republican Majority." [Associated Press | September 28, 2005]
"The next step in the criminal proceedings against Republican leader Tom DeLay is a trip to Austin to be fingerprinted and photographed....It was not immediately clear whether DeLay would have to go through booking after responding to the summons for arraignment, said his attorney Bill White. [Associated Press | September 28, 2005]posted by ericb at 9:15 PM on September 28, 2005
"Now, with the administration struggling to overcome complaints about its response to Hurricane Katrina and the declining support for the war in Iraq, Bush needs DeLay more than ever. But DeLay, waylaid by yesterday's indictment, won't be there.It will be interesting to see the impact on President Bush's and Congress' ability to advance their policy initiatives forward -- or, not -- and the impact on the 2006 elections.
Instead, there will be the taint of another ethics investigation in the Republican Party at the same time that Senate majority leader Bill Frist answers questions from the Securities and Exchange Commission about his sale of stock in a company that family members founded; as Bush's chief political adviser, Karl Rove, faces grand jury scrutiny over whether he leaked the identity of a CIA officer; and as a Senate committee looks at the relationships between scandal-ridden lobbyist Jack Abramoff and a host of Republican leaders.
The combined loss of DeLay's leadership in the House, where he was the main enforcer of the Republican agenda, and the shift of political focus to another alleged ethics misstep, is a double blow to the president at a time when he cannot easily bounce back from it, political observers said yesterday.
'I think all that voters will hear is "Republican scandal," ' said Daron Shaw, a University of Texas political scientist who worked on Bush's 2000 campaign.
DeLay's foibles could take an immediate toll on the Republican agenda, which during the Bush years has tended to originate in the House with DeLay-enforced party-line votes.
The cobbled-together leadership team that is replacing DeLay as House majority leader may yet succeed in keeping the legislative pipeline moving." [Boston Globe | September 29, 2005]
"DeLay will not plea nolo contendere at the arraingment. There will be a not guilty plea entered there, but he will eventually plea at least nolo contendere.posted by ericb at 10:43 AM on September 29, 2005
In about January when the hearings get started, I expect the plea to be changed to nolo contendere. This is because DeLay has most likely already entered into a plea bargain. My reasoning is because of timing and the indictment itself.
First of all, DeLay entered into a meeting with Ronnie Earle and the Public Integrity unit of the Travis County DA's office on August 17. This would be more than three years after most of the events surrounding the money laundering operation would have taken place and thus, the statute of limitations would have already run out on the conspiracy charge.
Second, look to the language in the indictment itself:The Grand Jury further presents that, with the advise and consent of counsel, the defendent, Thomas Dale DeLay, did heretofore knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waive application of Articles 12.01 and 12.02 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure to the indictment presented herein. In particular, the Grand Jury present that with the advice and consent of counsel, the defendent, Thomas Dale DeLay, did knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waive the requirement that an indictment for the felony offense of criminal conspiracy, the object of which is felony other than those listed in Subdivisions (1) and (5) of Article 12.01 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, may be presented within three years from the date of commission of the offense, and not afterward, insofar as such requirement pertains to the indictment presented herein.'Now comes the logic part. Why would his attorney advise him to waive the statute of limitations on a charge when the statute of limitations had already run out? The only logical answer is that there were far more serious charges with a much longer (or no) statute of limitations and he was entering into a plea bargain.
So basically, the current posturing about 'political prosecution' and a prosecutor who is a 'partisan fanatic' is just that, posturing. Anybody old enough to remember the Nixon era will also remember that Spiro Agnew did exactly the same thing! After all is said and done, he'll leave the Congress and still have a lucrative career as a paid lobbyist."
“New Hampshire Republican Congressman Jeb Bradley says he will return 15-thousand dollars in campaign funds from former House majority leader Tom DeLay’s political action committee....Bradley says that though the political action committee that gave him money is not under investigation he is returning the money to remove any question about the nature of the contribution.”posted by ericb at 11:00 AM on September 29, 2005
"...Ronnie Earle didn’t issue the indictment against Tom DeLay. A grand jury did. And as it turns out, the jury foreman William Gibson is a former sheriff’s deputy who praises DeLay specifically for his 'aggressiveness.'posted by ericb at 8:35 AM on September 30, 2005'He did his duty and that bound him to look at Tom Delay as just another Texan accused of criminal conspiracy, [Gibson] said.
'I like his aggressiveness and everything, and I had nothing against the House majority man, but I felt that we had enough evidence, not only me, but the other grand jury members,' Gibson said.
The grand jury foreman also takes great exception to accusations that he and 11 other grand jury members followed the lead of Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle instead of following the evidence.
'It was not a rubber stamp deal. It was not an overnight deal. If we needed extra information, it was provided to us,' Gibson said. …
Gibson thinks there is enough evidence to convict Delay.
'We would not have handed down an indictment. We would have no-billed the man, if we didn’t feel there was sufficient evidence,' said Gibson." [News 8 Austin | September 29, 2005]
"A Texas grand jury indicted U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay on a new charge of money laundering Monday, less than a week after another grand jury leveled a conspiracy charge that forced DeLay to temporarily step down as House majority leader.posted by ericb at 3:24 PM on October 3, 2005
Both indictments accuse DeLay and two political associates of conspiring to get around a state ban on corporate campaign contributions by funneling the money through a political action committee to the Republican National Committee in Washington.
DeLay's earlier indictment charged that conspirators carried out a fund-raising scheme by having the DeLay-founded Texans for a Republican Majority Political Action Committee send corporate money to the Republican National Committee. The RNC then sent back a like amount — $190,000 — to distribute to Texas candidates in 2002, the indictment alleges.
Criminal conspiracy is a Texas felony punishable by six months to two years in a state jail and a fine of up to $10,000. DeLay was summoned by a judge to appear in court in Austin on Oct. 21. [The Associated Press | October 3, 2005]
« Older Tennis, anyone...?... | Politics, Theory & Photography... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by rzklkng at 10:35 AM on September 28, 2005