Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Marvelous Marv
Here's one by Host's favorite columnist, Robert Novak.
Link
I'm hoping that I won't have to see the usual arguments to the effect that "So-and-so said this, so it must not be true."
P.S. The situation comes into sharper perspective when you remember that Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi has actually been found guilty of violating federal campaign finance laws. |
It appears from the following, new report, that the limited amount of information that has been disclosed, indicates, at the least, that the charges against Tom Delay are not frivolous. Delay is either a victim of circumstances and an unfortunate coincidence of timing (and an identical dollar amount of alledgedly laundered funds, vs. funds sent by the RNC back to Texas legislative candidates) or....he knowingly broke the law.
It is not reasonable, with Delay's power and influence, to portray him as some kind of "victim" of frivolous indictment by a rougue prosecutor.
Tom Delay has a defense fund, he does not have to use his own funds if he chooses to mount a vigorous defense against the criminal charges. He gets to keep his seat in congress, and the perks and income that come with the job.
Quote:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...100601903.html
DeLay Meeting, RNC Actions Coincided
Financial Transactions Began on Day Texan Met With Fundraiser
By R. Jeffrey Smith
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, October 7, 2005; Page A05
Former House majority leader Tom DeLay (R-Tex.) met for at least 30 minutes with the top fundraiser of his Texas political action committee on Oct. 2, 2002, the same day that the Republican National Committee in Washington set in motion a series of financial transactions at the heart of the money-laundering and conspiracy case against DeLay...........
...........The prosecutor who brought the indictment, Ronnie Earle, has not described the evidence he presented to the grand jury linking DeLay to the $190,000 transactions. <b>But the fact that DeLay and his alleged co-conspirator, fundraiser Ellis, conferred on the same day the checks were ordered has attracted the attention of lawyers involved in the case because of speculation that the two men shared important information that day.</b>
To prove that DeLay participated in money laundering or in a conspiracy to conduct it -- the two allegations in the felony indictment brought against DeLay on Monday morning -- Earle will have to prove two things, according to lawyers who are closely following the case: The transactions involving the $190,000 were illegal, and DeLay played some critical role, by approving them or by helping to carry them out.
DeLay and Ellis have so far given slightly different accounts of the substance of their discussion. Ellis's attorney, Jonathan D. Pauerstein, said that Ellis recalls that their Oct. 2 discussion did not concern or involve Texas or Texas candidates. But DeLay, interviewed last weekend on "Fox News Sunday," said that during a "scheduling meeting" with Ellis in October, Ellis said while they were leaving his office that "by the way, we sent money" to Washington................
|
As far as Pelosi....it is a different case. She reacted differently. She seems to have cooperated with the FEC. Numerous elected officials seem to be treated the same as she was by the FEC. She is not a member of the party that controls both houses of congress and the executive branch. If the civil offenses that she was accused of, rise to a level of criminality or violation of house ethics that dictate or justify a criminal investigation, I have every confidence that politicians of the party in power control the influence and the resources to pursue criminal penalties against her. Write letters to your elected federal representatives, Marv. That is your right.
Tom Delay's prosecution is a seperate matter than Pelosi's. Delay maintains his innocence publicly, using all means at his disposal to vigorously attempt to discredit the prosecutor by attacking him personally. It seems like an even match. Delay is no "victim". That concept is only a weak "talking point".
1. The complaint (not a criminal complaint) against Pelosi was filed by the National Legal and Policy Center. NLPC is sub-rosa legal foundation funded primarily by the right wing of the Republican Party.
2. NLPC involves itself in targeting Democratic Party leadership and labor union leaders to launch ethics lawsuits against.
3. Peter Flaherty one of the founders is the former director of the "Citizens for Reagan" lobbying group.
Quote:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...-2004Feb9.html
Minority Leader's Fund-Raisers Fined
By ERICA WERNER
The Associated Press
Monday, February 9, 2004; 5:25 PM
.......... "We checked with the FEC; we thought this was OK. When we found out it wasn't, we did everything aboveboard, and we've been complying with them," Daly said.
Daly said Pelosi would dissolve Team Majority after the FEC ends its case. Two Democrats - Maryland Rep. Chris Van Hollen and Julie Thomas, who ran unsuccessfully for Congress in Iowa - have been fined $2,500 each in connection with donations received from the committee. A Democratic source said the agency was negotiating with a third congressional committee before closing the case. .............
................. In the 2002 election cycle, Pelosi gave more than two dozen candidates the $5,000 maximum contribution from Team Majority as well as PAC to the Future, which is her main leadership PAC - thereby exceeding contribution limits.
Team Majority gave back more than $100,000 that was collected above limits, records show. It also collected more than $140,000 that Daly said was within the proper limits. That money was spent last year to support Pelosi's fund-raising activities, including money for salaries, legal fees and phone services, and $2,176 to entertain donors at a box at the Simon and Garfunkel Concert at the MCI Center in December, records show..................
|