Thursday, 6 October 2005
|0816 - Travis County DA went grand jury shopping|
After the first grand jury handed down an indictment against Tom DeLay that will probably get thrown out - because it alleges conduct that wasn't criminal at the time - Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle went to a second grand jury to get another indictment for money laundering.
That grand jury, according to a report on CNN, refused to issue the requested indictment.
Only after Earle went to yet another grand jury did he get an indictment, based solely on an interview Earle had with DeLay. No other evidence, period. Normally, DAs that can't get an indictment don't try again, but not this guy. It's called "forum shopping", and is usually frowned upon.
When will the Left admit that Earle's indictments are just partisan abuse of his office, and don't have any real substance to them? He got them - and let's face it, they're not the grand jury's indictments, but Earle's; a halfway competent DA can get a chicken sandwich indicted, which just shows how thin the second one is! - purely as a way to force DeLay from the majority leader's post in the House. It should be noted here that, despite all the screaming from the Left when that rule was repealed early this year, the Democrats have no similar rule of their own.
current mood: cynical
current music: Marshall Tucker Band - Ghost Riders in the Sky
They're all corrupt, criminal whores. Any of 'em get tossed in jail is fine by me, and if DAs have to 'forum shop' for grand juries that'll indict, that's also fine by me.
Man voted for a Constitutional Amendment barring same-sex marriage, for three banning flag 'desecration,' voted against medical marijuana, thinks public schools should be free to require students to pray, and he's a whore for China.
Fuck him. He's repeatedly and flagrantly violated his oath to uphold the Constitution, and thereby in a truly just world would see a good long stretch of jailtime, because a truly just world wouldn't have such a bullshit concept as legislative immunity.
The more of these bastards we get out of office, the fewer there are of them to gut the principles upon which this nation was founded. Too bad, so sad, byebye.
On that basis, though, you'd have to throw all 535 of them in the slammer. (Yeah, yeah, I know: "a good start".) What frosts me is that the Democrats have been doing it for decades, and only now that the American public has had enough of them do they decry it.
and only now that the American public has had enough of them do they decry it.
Well, someone has to.
The Republican party in Congress is engaged in a verbatim replay of the Democrats in '93: they're in firm power, so they're engaged in a feeding frenzy so ridiculously unseemly that it's certain to cost them both houses at the earliest elective opportunity.
When will the Left admit that Earle indictments are just partisan abuse of his office, and don't have any real substance to them?
Including, presumably, the time he indicted himself?
He what??! I haven't heard this one...
He indicted himself for a campaign finance violation (being late in filing required reports). It was a misdemeanor; he paid the fine
Never mind that; what about all these corrupt chicken sandwiches? I demand ANSWERS!
No offense, but Republicans are so full of horse manure it's not even funny!
You guys sound like such hypocrits when ever you say, "It's all about politics!"
When ever Democrats said that about White Water, or the Lewinsky case, all we heard you Republicans talk about was, how it's all about the law! You sad, sad horse manure soaked Republicans always tout law and order and rules, and how it's so important to enforce them, even if they are politically motivated, like White Water or Lewinsky!
Yet when your own boys get indited, all the sudden you stop talking law and order, and you start shifting the focus from the person being investigated to the one doing the investigation!
This is kind of comical, because that's what Democrats did to Ken Starr! They shifted focus from Clintons wrong doings, to how Starr and Republicans are just doing it for politics!
And now you Republicans are acting much like Democrats! You've changed from desiring law and order, and now you're for shifting blame to the investigator, just like the Dems did to Ken Starr!
Sorry, but that is the real horse manure here!
If you guys want to be all law and order, then discuss whether or not Delay did it! Don't sit around blaming the prosecutor! Don't sit around talking political motives! YOu're REPUBLICANS for crying out loud, talk about what you always talk about, enforcement of the LAW!
If I thought DeLay actually did anything wrong, I'd be calling for his head too. I don't. That the prosecutor had to go to three grand juries with his extremely thin case for an indictment on money-laundering charge, and that the first one was for something that wasn't even a crime, just shows how desperate he was to indict DeLay on anything at all.
I believe that, in the end, this whole thing will be shown as yet another indictment obtained for purely political reasons. There's no substance there. This isn't the first time Earle has done it, either: he got an indictment for Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison right after she was elected the first time, and that one was thrown out on its ear.
You'll notice that I haven't said anything about the Whitewater scandal and the Clintons. That's because nothing was ever proven. The reason I complain so much about Clinton's perjury in the Lewinsky case is precisely because he admitted to lying under oath. If I'd done that, I'd have gone to prison. He got a slap on the wrist for it.
There's an alternative policy on why Earle couldn't get an indictment on the first grand jury, which is that the Republican-stacked jury refused to indict DeLay because he was a Republican. If it can go one way, why not the other? The only way to find out which side isn't playing politics is to let it go to court and play out.
In fact, it seems like your main basis for why you believe DeLay is innocent is that it's a Democratic DA that's prosecuting him. That, and speculations and interpretations of the law made in right-wing blogs that provide no proof to back those speculations up...
1) It's a Democrat DA that's prosecuting him.
2) Said Democrat has made political prosecutions before with no basis...or have you forgotten the similar hack job on Kay Bailey Hutchison? Dick DeGuerin sure won't - he defended her, too.
3) Not one, but two, grand juries refused to indict on the money-laundering charge - the original one that handed down the indictment for a crime that wasn't, and the second one.
4) The evidence presented and reported not only in right-wng blogs but in such bastions of mainstream journalism as CNN was extremely flimsy even by grand jury standards.
5) Earle got the first indictment after dragging the process out for 18 months, and a few days before the grand jury's term expired - and after saying publicly that DeLay was not a target of the investigation. Only when the leftist Austin newspaper asked pointedly why Earle had bothered at all did he get the indictment. The timing is just too convenient.
If another DA with no history of political hackery had gotten the indictments, I'd be inclined to look more favorably on them. As it is, though, Earle has zero credibility.
See, you're continuing to use the fact that he's a Democrat as evidence against him. That alone damages your credibility right there.
I'm still waiting to see some actual examples instead of you just saying "look, a lot of right-wing blogs and CNN are saying it, so it must be true". You can't just claim it's there; cite it, if you want people to believe you.
As it is, you're not making a strong argument at all. You're just kind of saying something and expecting everyone to believe you, and getting upset when they don't. You'd make a bad lawyer, and that alone should be enough to convince people that you're not the best source to look to for an opinion on whether or not there's a legitimate case here.
I pointed to the CNN article. What more do you want?
Something that actually backs up factual assertions like "because it alleges conduct that wasn't criminal at the time", because that CNN article doesn't.
While I'm here, here's a link to an AP article
describing how Earle tried to browbeat the second grand jury into the indictment it had refused to grant, and that that may well constitute prosecutorial misconduct.
It would seem that you are once again distorting the news to fit your argument. That news article describes allegations of DA Earle doing so, made by DeLay and his legal staff, and that's a totally different thing than the article describing that he did it, as your wording suggests.
The fact that you keep taking one side's argument and claiming it as solidified fact is what damages your credibility.
I'm not worried about my credibility with leftists like you. You're not going to believe me anyway. You've already convicted DeLay in your mind, "innocent until proven guilty" be damned.
It's pretty typical of you to take such an easy way out rather than attempt to come up with actual sources when your facts are challenged. If you're so right, you should be able to easily prove me wrong, but you don't, and anyone who reads your journal, "leftist" or not, will end up seeing that.
I came up with sources, but you didn't accept them. CNN and AP apparently don't count. I'm done trying, because if you won't accept reports form the MSM, who will you accept reports from?
It's hilarious watching how you'll assert certain "facts" in someone else's LJ, have them refuted and picked apart, and then come back and post the same "facts" in your own LJ, knowing that they've already been dismantled elsewhere. Speaks a lot about your character, that.
That's because what you claim is "refuted and picked apart" is merely more of the same leftist drivel.
Ah, yes. The old "leftist drivel" label, which you can slap on anything in order to arbitrarily dismiss it, even as you fail to provide evidence to back up pretty much any of your own arguments.
You're such a hypocrite.