Comments on: Delay indicted in campaign finance probe

By: Brian

Brian — Wed, 05 Oct 2005 02:06:04 +0000

Baklava said: Is someone innocent until proven guilty Webmistress?

Webmistress said: Sure. Delay is most definitely innocent until proven guilty. I state this unequivocally. It is the law of the land and one of our most basic rights.

Actually if Tom Delay broke the law, he became guilty when he broke the law. The law of the land is, “a person is considered innocent until they are proven guilty”, but that doesn’t mean they are innocent. I’m not saying Tom Delay broke the law, that’s for a judge and jury to decide, but if he did break the law, he is guilty.

By: Baklava

Baklava — Fri, 30 Sep 2005 17:41:45 +0000

Webmistress,

Cool. Please post the law that was broken so we can read it.

Too much talking points and analysis by the media makes them non-reporters in my opinion.

By: J Rob

J Rob — Fri, 30 Sep 2005 13:59:15 +0000

Mr. Earl, it seems has a history of using his office for carrying out vendettas regardless of party affiliation. He also has a history of getting indictments laughed out of court as was the case with Kay Bailey-Hutchinson. A history of commenting about on-going investigations and grand jury leaks. That is whats known, in most states, as prosecutorial misconduct. I also think his allowing a film crew to record his latest “victory” while it was in-the-making should also qualify him to be disbarred.
Even if Delay did to what is alleged in the indictment (actually there is only a very vague charge with no factual statement to support it), Earl’s conduct of the matter has put the case in jeopardy. If Delay is guilty then let him receive the disgrace he would then deserv. Until such time as he is convicted, Mr. Earl’s conduct deserves scrutiny as well.

By: webmistress

webmistress — Fri, 30 Sep 2005 02:08:24 +0000

Baklava,

I’ll bite. “The same funds were then ‘ALLEGEDLY’ given to the candidates.”

I’m not purporting to give evidence in the case. I was trying to explain the pertinent points of Texas campaign finance laws.

–Mistress

By: Baklava

Baklava — Fri, 30 Sep 2005 00:46:33 +0000

Webmistress,

But you did write, “The same funds were then given to the candidates.” without any evidence. Just using Democrat talking points….

Did you understand my second post? It addresses your sentence (the talking point)

By: webmistress

webmistress — Fri, 30 Sep 2005 00:41:15 +0000

Baklava,

Sure. Delay is most definitely innocent until proven guilty. I state this unequivocally. It is the law of the land and one of our most basic rights.

Please note that I wrote “allegedly” in my post to Cavilier. He questioned what crime Delay committed. I stated my basic understanding of Texas campaign finance law.

–Mistress

By: Baklava

Baklava — Thu, 29 Sep 2005 23:23:29 +0000

Webmistress wrote, “Allegedly, the corporations donated money to the RNC or a national PAC. The same funds were then given to the candidates.”

Logic is good.

Let’s do this. If someone pays my company (which will remain unnamed) money. And then my company pays someone else. Where does someone determine that those were the SAME FUNDS as Democrats are alleging? In no bookeeping system do you designate something as being the same funds. It is income or revenue. And then their are expenditures and you categorize your expenditures. Where does anyone get off thinking that their donation to the RNC or DNC will be spent EXACTLY as they wish as if they had control of the funds?

There is no logic to the charge and it’ll be hillarious to see what manipulations you guys have to go through to make believe someone is guilty of something when it is impossible. People like Martha are convicted though so I’m sure Delay can get convicted just because people don’t like him.

By: Baklava

Baklava — Thu, 29 Sep 2005 23:19:43 +0000

Webmistress wrote, “What if Delay really is guilty?” Then he’ll be found guilty.

Is someone innocent until proven guilty Webmistress?

By: Evon

Evon — Thu, 29 Sep 2005 20:06:00 +0000

There is a lot that goes on in political fundraising that I don’t care for even when it’s legal. I’m withholding my judgment on this. The play the MSM is giving this doesn’t pass the “smell test.” One could even say it has a certain “stench” to it, to borrow a reporter’s term from yesterday. That Earl prosecuted Democrats when there were next to no Republicans in Texas politics just shows that he has always used his office for political purposes.
I suspect this is just another political attack.

By: webmistress

webmistress — Thu, 29 Sep 2005 17:41:22 +0000

PCD,

What if Delay really is guilty?

–Mistress

By: Publius Rendezvous

Publius Rendezvous — Thu, 29 Sep 2005 16:05:36 +0000

‘Ends’ Justifying Whatever ‘Means’ Necessary

It seems as though that our friends on the left side of the aisle will stop at nothing to utterly destroy our Republican leaders through any means they deem necessary necessary. As you very well may know, Tom Delay had a “one count of criminal conspi…

By: PCD

PCD — Thu, 29 Sep 2005 15:47:53 +0000

This is going to backfire on the Democrats. Earle went to seven different grand juries before he got this indictment. Shades of Dan Rather and Mary Mapes chasing the Bush was AWOL fantasy. It is a valid comparison since both Democrat conspiracies originated in Travis County, Texas.

When will someone publish ALL of Earle’s politically driven indictments? The man has a track record. He won’t be able to run away from his misuse of his office because DeLay is going to pursue charges after he is exhonorated, aquitted, found not guilty.

By: Iowa Voice

Iowa Voice — Thu, 29 Sep 2005 06:53:49 +0000

Tom DeLay Indicted

Just saw on the news that Tom DeLay (R-Texas) has been indicted by a grand jury in Texas.

GOP rules are that he must step down as Majority Leader. I haven’t been following the entire scandal, but from what I do know, I think that he should resign …

By: Sister Toldjah

Sister Toldjah — Thu, 29 Sep 2005 00:28:36 +0000

Absolutely, Bach!

By: Bachbone

Bachbone — Wed, 28 Sep 2005 23:58:45 +0000

Once the legal process is finished, let the political chips fall on any head that deserves them, Democrat or Republican. I agree, ST, that the belief in getting rid of all corrupt politicians seems to separate conservatives from liberals. Conservatives have drilled their own guys, when necessary, as much as they have the opposition.