DeLay Indicted for conspiracy!

[Balta1701]

The Democratic party played by a Republican party rule? I'm hearing the Dems don't have this same rule for themselves.

Actually you know what, you're 1/2 right, and I apologize. While the Democrats didn't have a written rule, I believe they did remove people from power (Rostenkowski) when they were indicted back int he early 90's.

 

The Democrats put the rule into their party's rules early this year when the Republicans were trying to remove the same rule from theirs.

 

Link

[mreye]

Actually you know what, you're 1/2 right, and I apologize.  While the Democrats didn't have a written rule, I believe they did remove people from power (Rostenkowski) when they were indicted back int he early 90's.

 

The Democrats put the rule into their party's rules early this year when the Republicans were trying to remove the same rule from theirs.

 

Link

So they said, "Hey, we'd better put this rule in if we're going to criticize the guys across the aisle for removing it, even though they've had it for quite some time!!"

 

Right?

 

Hard to start a smear campaign that way.

[KipWellsFan]

Look at what MRC (Media Research Council, ie liberal media witchhunters) claims is an example of media bias a couple of days ago.

 

Posted September 22, 2005

CNN's Jack Cafferty Smears Rep. Tom DeLay with "Indictment" Claim

 

Wolf Blitzer: "All right. Tom Delay says there’s no pork, everything is essential. I don’t know if you heard him say that?"

 

Jack Cafferty: "Has he been indicted yet?"

 

Blitzer, chuckling: "Well, we’ll leave that alone. Jack Cafferty, thank you very much."

-- Exchange between CNN's Wolf Blitzer and Jack Cafferty, The Situation Room, Sept. 21, 2005.

 

http://www.mrc.org/mp3/2005/audiobias09.asp

Edited September 28, 2005 by KipWellsFan

[Rex Kickass]

Discussion on any indictment of any political figure:

 

Supporter: Partisan hackjob!

Opposer: Actually, no. This guy goes after everyone. *inserts facts*

Supporter: Nuh-uh!

 

Whatever.

 

If he's guilty he should go to jail. If he's not his district should smarten up and vote the scumbag out. After all this is a guy who let Jack Abramoff take him to Saipan to protect the American sweatshop and sex trade there.

[Balta1701]

Scratch earlier post...it's no longer David Dreier, it's now Representative Roy Blunt.

[Balta1701]

Here's the rundown on Rep Blunt, who also was on that list from CREW that I posted a few days ago.

 

Legislative Assistance to Family Members

 

      Legislative Assistance for Philip Morris

 

In 2003, Rep. Blunt divorced his wife of 31 years to marry Philip Morris (now Altria) lobbyist Abigail Perlman. Before it was known publicly that Rep. Blunt and Ms. Perlman were dating – and only hours after Rep. Blunt assumed the role of Majority Whip – he tried to secretly insert a provision into Homeland Security legislation that would have benefitted Philip Morris, at the expense of competitors.

 

In addition, Rep. Blunt’s son Andrew lobbies on behalf of Philip Morris, a major client he picked up only four years out of law school. Notably, Altria is Rep. Blunt’s largest campaign contributor, having donated more than $270,000 to political committees tied to him.

 

      Legislative Assistance for United Parcel Service, Inc. and FedEx Corp.

 

In 2003, Rep. Blunt also helped his lobbyist son Andrew by inserting a provision into the $79 billion emergency appropriation for the war in Iraq to benefit U.S. shippers like United Parcel Service, Inc. and FedEx Corp. The provision required that military cargo be carried only by companies with no more than 25% foreign ownership. UPS and FedEx were seeking to block the expansion of a foreign-owned rival’s U.S. operations. Andrew Blunt lobbies on behalf of UPS in Missouri, and UPS and FedEx have contributed at least $58,000 to Rep. Blunt since 2001.

 

Members of the House are prohibited from "taking any official actions for the prospect of personal gain for themselves or anyone else." 5 CFR §2635.702(a). By pushing for legislation that would benefit Philip Morris and UPS, and, as a consequence, his then-girlfriend and his son, Rep. Blunt may have violated this provision.

 

Federal law also prohibits public officials from directly or indirectly demanding, seeking, receiving, accepting or agreeing to receive or accept anything of value in return for being influenced in the performance of an official act. If Rep. Blunt accepted campaign contributions from Philip Morris, FedEx or UPS in exchange for legislative assistance, he may have violated the bribery statute.

 

      Matt Blunt’s Political Campaigns

 

Family connections have also helped Rep. Blunt’s son, Missouri Governor Matt Blunt, who received campaign contributions from nearly three dozen influential Missouri lobbyists and lawyers when he ran for governor of Missouri in 2004, half of whom had provided financial support to his father.

 

In 2000, when Matt Blunt was running for Secretary of State, Rep. Blunt was involved in an apparent scheme to funnel money through a local party committee into Matt Blunt’s campaign committee. Committees tied to Rep. Blunt contributed $90,000 to the 7th District Congressional Republican Committee which, in turn, contributed $76,000 to Matt Blunt’s campaign committee. In addition, Altria – the company for which Blunt’s wife is the top lobbyist – made a $24,000 contribution to Matt Blunt’s campaign, and a $100,000 contribution to the 7th District Congressional Republican Committee.

 

The Committee on Standards of Official Conduct should investigate these campaign funding schemes to determine whether Rep. Blunt violated the law by improperly using his political connections to fill the coffers of his son’s campaign chest.

 

Moreover, Rule 23 of the House Ethics Manual requires all members of the House to conduct themselves "at all times in a manner that reflects creditably on the House." The Committee on Standards of Official Conduct should investigate the various schemes used by Rep. Blunt and his son to fund his son’s campaign to determine whether or not they reflect creditably on his position in the House.

 

Legislative Assistance for Jack Abramoff’s Client

 

Rep. Blunt and his staff have close connections to uber-lobbyist Jack Abramoff, who is the subject of criminal and congressional probes. In June 2003, Mr. Abramoff persuaded Majority Leader Tom DeLay to organize a letter, co-signed by Speaker Hastert, Whip Roy Blunt, and Deputy Whip Eric Cantor, that endorsed a view of gambling law benefitting Mr. Abramoff’s client, the Louisiana Coushatta, by blocking gambling competition by another tribe. Mr. Abramoff has donated $8,500 to Rep. Blunt’s leadership PAC, Rely on Your Beliefs.

 

If, as it appears, Rep. Blunt was accepting campaign contributions from Mr. Abramoff in exchange for using his official position so support a view of gambling law that would benefit Mr. Abramoff’s client, he would be in violation of the law.

 

Trip to Korea

 

Rep. Blunt attended a luncheon in Seoul in January 2002, that was paid for by the Korea-U.S. Exchange Council (KORUSEC), a registered foreign agent. House Rules provide that a Member, officer or employee may not accept travel expenses from a foreign agent. The Committee on Standards of Official Conduct should investigate whether Rep. Blunt violated this prohibition by accepting reimbursement for travel from KORUSEC.

[Mercy!]

By the way...since this is a random message board in the middle of the whole world of cyberspace I can do some rumor mongering...I'm sitting in the district next door to Dreier's, and while he's probably a step up from Delay, it's interesting to note that there have been rumors, and some fairly public accusations, that he is actually a closeted homosexual (and, I might add, a fairly reliable vote against anything that would remotely improve the lives of homosexuals in this country...gets a rating of 22 from the Human Rights campaign - a gay rights group)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Oh puhleese. No need to pussy foot around. The guy's a big ol' self-loathing closet case. I was looking forward to some great media moments, but I see someone must have given Hastert the 411 about what they had to look forward to with Dreier as even temporary Speaker.

[KipWellsFan]

Oh puhleese.  No need to pussy foot around.  The guy's a big ol' self-loathing closet case.  I was looking forward to some great media moments, but I see someone must have given Hastert the 411 about what they had to look forward to with Dreier as even temporary Speaker.

 

Apparently Dreier will be helping Blunt with his leadership duties.

[Mercy!]

Apparently Dreier will be helping Blunt with his leadership duties.

Uh huh. Far off camera so some pesky reporters don’t ask embarrassing questions.

 

Hey, I just looked at a map of Manitoba. Y’all sure do have beaucoup bodies of water in your province. Also totally unrelated to this thread – do you ever go watch the garter snake emergence at any of the local dens in the springtime? I hear it can be spectacular

[KipWellsFan]

Uh huh.  Far off camera so some pesky reporters don’t ask embarrassing questions.

 

Hey, I just looked at a map of Manitoba.  Y’all sure do have beaucoup bodies of water in your province.  Also totally unrelated to this thread – do you ever go watch the garter snake emergence at any of the local dens in the springtime?  I hear it can be spectacular

 

I think I'm the only kid in all of Manitoba that never checked out the snakes.

 

From what I hear it's Mating Balls like a muthaf***a!

[Mercy!]

....From what I hear it's Mating Balls like a muthaf***a!

You know, I've never heard it described quite that way, but that sounds just about right.

[Texsox]

It will be easier to catch a giant squid on film than catch Delay. He's a Texan, and a Republican, what could be more honest than that??

[Balta1701]

If anyone wants to try to figure out what sort of case Earle is actually going to be bringing against Delay, this piece is probably a good primer. The consensus opinion right now seems to be th at Earle wouldn't have enough to get Delay indicted unless one of Delay's aides, who are also facing prosecution, had flipped and agreed to testify against the exterminator.

[KipWellsFan]

The Jury Foreman speaks

 

http://www.news8austin.com/content/your_ne...asp?ArID=146685

 

"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.

 

The evidence is there to prove Delay was involved in wrongdoing and also prove that he and his fellow grand jurors acted independent of political influence, Gibson said.

 

"It wasn't Mr. Earle that indicted the man. It was the 12 members of the grand jury," Gibson said.

 

Gibson is a former sheriff's deputy and a former investigator for what is now the Texas Department of Insurance.

 

more at link

[Balta1701]

Here's a shocker...Tom Delay's lying to us.

 

The day after U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay's grand jury indictment, his lawyer and the jury foreman on Thursday appeared to contradict the Texas politician's assertions that he was not given a chance to speak before the jury.

 

The foreman, William M. Gibson Jr., a retired state insurance investigator, said the Travis County grand jury waited until Wednesday, the final day of its term, to indict him because it was hoping he would accept jurors' invitation to testify.

 

DeLay said in interviews that the grand jury never asked him to testify.

 

In a Wednesday night appearance on MSNBC's Hardball with Chris Matthews, he said Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle never talked to him or asked him to testify.

 

"Never asking me to testify, never doing anything for two years," DeLay said in the interview. "And then, on the last day of his fourth or sixth grand jury, he indicts me. Why? Because his goal was to make me step down as majority leader."

[LowerCaseRepublican]

http://movies.crooksandliars.com/The_Daily...elay_Partyb.wmv

 

TDS on Delay -- funny stuff.

[FlaSoxxJim]

Wowzer. The hammer is racking up indictments left and right.

 

Breaking News:

TEXAS GRAND JURY INDICTS U.S. REP. TOM DELAY ON A NEW CHARGE OF MONEY LAUNDERING

[Balta1701]

Link

 

Did we use up all the Champagne last Thursday?

Edited October 3, 2005 by Balta1701

[Texsox]

I hope this will not distract the Hammer from '08

 

Damn, I finally like a GOPerhead and he may not be around . . .

[YASNY]

If he does, in fact, turn out to be dirty then prosecute his crooked ass to the fullest extent of the law.

[Rex Kickass]

Three different counts from two different grand juries does make it seem like there's a stench of something there, that's for sure.

[southsider2k5]

A prior (3rd) grand jury had refused to indict Delay, and the 2nd one only indicted him after "new evidence" emerged after a 3 year investigation.

 

http://www.statesman.com/metrostate/conten.../10/5earle.html

[kapkomet]

This is crazy.

 

All this new evidence surfaces after all the pundits ran around saying the original indictments had no charges in them... and then POOF Monday we get a bunch of indictments with specific "money laundering" charges in them?

 

Something stinks. Bad. Take out the trash, will you?

 

Having said that, if the new "evidence" is one of the other people indicted and now they will get immunity, look out.

[Rex Kickass]

Kap,

 

The indictments came from separate grand juries.

 

They may have been looking at completely different things.

[kapkomet]

Kap,

 

The indictments came from separate grand juries.

 

They may have been looking at completely different things.

Ahh, I misread. Thanks for the clarification.

 

I stand by the last part of my statement, though, if one of the others indicted now has immunity to testify against DeLay, THE HAMMER is going DOWN. (waits for Tex)