|
phi1618
old hand
Registered: 02/14/04
Posts: 4,102
Last seen: 13 years, 10 months
|
more on tom delay
#4733228 - 09/29/05 07:06 PM (18 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
From this weeks Economist: http://www.economist.com/agenda/displayStory.cfm?story_id=4462459
What he's charged with:
Quote:
Along with two political associates, John Colyandro and Jim Ellis, he is accused of conspiracy to violate the election code in his home state of Texas. Mr DeLay has a political action committee called Texans for a Republican Majority (TRMPAC). Prosecutors allege that it accepted $155,000 from various companies, and then wrote a cheque for $190,000 to an arm of the Republican National Committee, with instructions to distribute chunks of the stash to individual candidates in Texas. In effect, the indictment argues, TRMPAC enabled the party to get around the ban on corporate donations to individual candidates.
prosecutorial bias?
Quote:
Mr Earle is a liberal Democrat who, in 1993, indicted Kay Bailey Hutchison, now the state?s senior Republican senator, on what ?The Almanac of American Politics? called ?flimsy charges he was forced to drop the first day the case came to court?. Against that, Mr Earle has prosecuted four times as many Democrats as Republicans.
The full article is much more widely focused, but I thought these quotes in particular were clear explanations of a couple of contentious points.
|
Catalysis
EtherealEngineer
Registered: 04/23/02
Posts: 1,742
Last seen: 15 years, 8 months
|
Re: more on tom delay [Re: phi1618]
#4733256 - 09/29/05 07:13 PM (18 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
TRMPAC enabled the party to get around the ban on corporate donations to individual candidates.
Yeah, thats pretty much how it works. What Earle has to prove is that the named corporations contributed that money for the direct purpose of funneling it to Delay and that this was all set up by Delay beforehand.
There is nothing illegal about PAC contributing money to Delay nor is it illegal for corporations to contribute to PAC. You don't have to be a lawyer to see that the case is on shakey ground. I haven't seen the evidence though so I can't jump to any conclusions other than that.
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 9 months
|
Re: more on tom delay [Re: Catalysis]
#4733299 - 09/29/05 07:19 PM (18 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
"Widely focused"
Are you fucking kidding me?
--------------------
|
Fuman
Tao of Shrooms
Registered: 11/26/02
Posts: 250
Loc: Further
Last seen: 4 years, 7 months
|
Re: more on tom delay [Re: zappaisgod]
#4733669 - 09/29/05 08:45 PM (18 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
The prosecutor Mr. Earle has prosecuted 15 politicians during his 27 year career and 12 of them were Democrats. Don't listen to the spin that is put out to discredit the prosecutor. Mr. Earle didn't indict Tom Delay, the grand jury did. He is doing his job. Tom Delay is a dirty politician and it is illegal in Texas for corporations to give money to politicians. What Delay and TRMpac did was to give 190,000 from corporations to the RNC and then have the RNC write checks totaling 190,00 to certain republicans in Texas. The entire goal was to get a Republican majority in the Texas house and gerrymander areas of Texas so that they could send more republicans to the US house. I think you will see that this is a strong case and more will be revealed.
-------------------- No, I do not think I am above the law. There are times; inspired and enraptured that I feel I am BEYOND the law.
|
Catalysis
EtherealEngineer
Registered: 04/23/02
Posts: 1,742
Last seen: 15 years, 8 months
|
Re: more on tom delay [Re: Fuman]
#4733838 - 09/29/05 09:22 PM (18 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
What Delay and TRMpac did was to give 190,000 from corporations to the RNC and then have the RNC write checks totaling 190,00 to certain republicans in Texas.
That is standard operating procedure for both republican and democrat PACs. They get contributions and they can contribute money.
|
phi1618
old hand
Registered: 02/14/04
Posts: 4,102
Last seen: 13 years, 10 months
|
Re: more on tom delay [Re: zappaisgod]
#4735547 - 09/30/05 08:13 AM (18 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said: "Widely focused"
Are you fucking kidding me?
Are you mocking my choice of words? I just meant that these points were incidental to the theme of the linked article, but I don't want to talk (more sloppy language) about what the article was about.
|
|