http://www.jsonline.com/news/state/aug03/162382.asp

Interestingly, my CNN source was Mark Shields’ editorial which made Tom DeLay somehow the center of the Marianas affair.
My FOX source informed that Abramoff, “who has been associated with Bush and DeLay” was at the center of tje Marianas investigation into monies paid by their government to him.

Not at all different from Earle’s investigation.

If I had a teenage daughter, I still wouldn’t let her babysit over at the Clintons. Maybe I wouldn’t let go to the Marianas to seek employment, either. But, then again, I wouldn’t let her take a spring break in Aruba or Bali, either.

I’d ask you what’s worse—extra-marital sex between consenting adults or forcing young women and children into brothels?

As to keeping children away from DeLay, he’s only accused of moving some money around, not poking any available piece of poontang from here to Podunk, like some ex – President I could name, but dare not on this thread, where he is worshipped as a god (and I don’t mean Kennedy)

And I’ve also got to say that it’s interesting to see in this case and in the Rove case that suddenly, for right wingers, right and wrong is determined not by whether something is right or wrong but whether it’s prosecutable. So, OJ killed his wife and Clinton is a serial sex-harrasser, but if Earle can’t make it stick then DeLay is pure as the driven snow.

Regardless of whether Earle ever puts together a winning case, there’s not a shadow of doubt in my mind that DeLay is a crooked scumbag. Now, should he be fined or imprisoned on the basis of my opinion of him? Absolutely not. But that won’t stop me from telling everyone who cares to listen that they should definitely keep their children away from him.

As we see from Prof. Dix s comments above

Well, here are some of Dix’s comments that were conviently ignored above:

George E. Dix, a law professor at the University of Texas and a specialist in criminal procedures, speculated that prosecutors “saw a potential problem” with the conspiracy counts “and didn’t want to hassle over it, so they went with a legal theory on money laundering that wouldn’t present the same problems.” He said if that was the case, it could be embarrassing to Mr. Earle because “it is a little awkward to have to change a theory before your horse is out of the gate.”

He most certainly was charged with a crime in the first indictment: criminal conspiracy.

*(Sigh)* Go back and look what Texas election codes were alleged to have been broken in the indictment. Why do you think Earle went back to a second grand jury and acquired a more specific charge? Did he just forget to do it the first time around?

*(Sigh)* Go back and look what Texas election codes were alleged to have been broken in the indictment. Why do you think Earle went back to a second grand jury and acquired a more specific charge? Did he just forget to do it the first time around?

Let s wait and see what the judge says, shall we?

I have no problem with this. Of course, Oliver wants to milk the “corruption” angle for all it’s worth before this happens. If he’s found guilty, then plaster his face everywhere with a big “Republican” and “Culture of Corruption” on it. Until then, I’ll look at the facts rather than what political gain can be manufactured.

in case the old one is thrown out on a technicality

Er…the “technicality” being that he wasn’t charged with a crime within the first indictment…which several people (myself included) pointed out in the first round of threads.

Before the accusations of DeLay being my boy are thrown around by some commenters again…let me remind you that I’m just pointing out the obvious from the first indictment based on, you know, reading it.

I have no idea what evidence Earle has against DeLay and maybe the second indictment is more specific about his alleged illegal activity.

From Roll Call, Feb. 9, 2004:

http://www.rollcall.com/pub/49_75/news/4293-1.html

“A controversial fundraising committee run by House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) was slapped with a $21,000 fine by the Federal Election Commission for enabling Pelosi to funnel more than $100,000 in illegal contributions to Democratic candidates in late 2002 as she was vying to become Democratic leader.”

Campaign finances are a very dangerous place to go snooping around.

Be careful what you wish for.

I think that’s what brought about the intemperate outburst from Delay quoted in the article: he feels himself being checkmated.

outer_space: different grand jury, same prosecutor who (in case anyone has forgotten) has prosecuted far more corrupt Democrats than corrupt Republicans

Do I hear two….

How about skinnin?

Burn, Bug-boy, BURN!!!