Food for thought re: Delay

Posted by: ST on September 29, 2005 at 3:11 pm

Bryan at Junkyard Blog points out a piece by the editors at NRO that discusses the charges against Tom Delay and is making me rethink about this issue.   I’ve been a skeptic of Delay’s innocence on this because of the trouble he’s gotten himself into in the past in the House.  But the NRO editors have a different take and point out that even though they have criticized Delay in the past, these particular charges in their opinion are baseless.  They conclude by saying:

One needn’t be a DeLay flack to see this. We have had criticisms of DeLay ourselves — his support of the Medicare-drug benefit, his relationship with disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff, and his recent comments about the “pared down” budget all come to mind. But this indictment is outrageous and should not be allowed to succeed as a tactic. While the political fallout of this indictment will take time to sort through, this case makes one thing clear: Campaign-finance regulation makes prosecution a continuation of politics by other means.

If you read the entire piece, they make a pretty convincing case for the baselessness of the charges. 

Bryan notes this in his post:

Republicans who have been quick to throw DeLay to the Democrats should note, the indictment against him is weak, the evidence against him is nonexistent, and he maintains his innocence. His accuser is a known partisan with a track record of abusing his powers. If we allow the Democrats to force us to jettison DeLay on the basis of this case, we are setting up a big trap for ourselves. In the same way that throwing Michael Brown under all those flooded New Orleans buses didn’t blunt the Dems’ unfair criticism of Bush’s response to FEMA, tossing out DeLay won’t stop the Democrats from going after other elected conservatives. You can’t count on the Democrats to approach DeLay or disasters or the war or anything else in good faith anymore. They will circle around their own and they will lash out at the rest of us, even if it means people in Iraq or New Orleans die. Giving them DeLay will just increase their lust for more Republican blood. It will do nothing to placate them.

Excellent point.  I think there is (subconsciously) a fair amount of "let’s placate the Dems" mentality as it relates to Delay coming from some on the Republican side and I think the Republicans who are operating on that basis should reassess.  I’m reassessing because the more information I read, the more this seems like a trumped up charge – just like Plamegate.  Instead of believing in Delay’s guilt because of things he’s done in the past, I should have done a better job of examining the nature of this charge on its own merits.

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Trackbacks

  • BIG DOG's WEBLOG trackbacked with The Party Of Intolerance On Air Amerika Comrade
  • 16 Responses to “Food for thought re: Delay”

    Comments

    1. Bachbone says:

      In her blog, Michelle Malkin has a note from a former federal DOJ attorney who cites evidence for her opinion that the DeLay indictment is baseless. And Rush said today that five grand juries refused to indict before the sixth did. With apologies to Bettie Davis, “Buckle up! It’s going to be a bumpy ride.”

    2. Melissa in Texas says:

      I just moved back to Austin last year. I it has been quiet for ol’ Ronnie Earl, so I guess he had to stir up something to get himself in the spotlight.
      I worked for a retail store here in Austin in 1983. Ronnie and the folks that owned the store were plotting as to how they could get him into the governor’s mansion, way back then.
      Would not surprise me to see him try…

    3. webmistress says:

      And Rush said today that five grand juries refused to indict before the sixth did.

      And we should believe everything Rush says!

    4. Walter E. Wallis says:

      The bigest mistake the republicans made was in letting Gingrich quit. It damn near cost the election. The republicans should have made him stay in and fight.
      Don’t ever let the enemy chose your generals. Now republicans should get behind DeLay and, also, like in the travel thing, start plowing for democrat defalcations of the same type. Sometimes you just gotta cure a dog of sucking eggs.

    5. Aidan Maconachy says:

      It’s common knowledge that Earle has been frothing at the bit for some time now in his efforts to nail DeLay. So there is no doubt that DeLay is being targeted. But I am so disappointed with the performance of the GOP I’m about ready to throw in the towel on this one.

      For a long time I stuck up for the guy. Six months ago when Pelosi and Reid were piling on the accusations, it irked the hell out of me because unlike Pelosi, DeLay has never been fined by the FEC for misusing funds – something Pelosi did during her election bid. Even though there were rampant suspicions and rumors being spread by the Dems about all of DeLays supposed evils, the guy was never actually nailed cold.

      I mean Harry Reid is one to point the finger! In Nevada he was responsible for getting legislation passed that changed land boundaries and his family and associates cashed in big time. Course Harry claims it was all for the environment – yeah right.

      Meantime I guess, it’s wait and see time as far as DeLay is concerned.

    6. CavalierX says:

      >I guess he had to stir up something to
      >get himself in the spotlight

      He’s performing for the film crew making a movie of his “heroic” fight against the “eeevil” Tom DeLay. I wonder if it’ll end in a climactic sword-fight in the courtroom?

    7. You’ll notice that this business of sacrificing a troubled member to placate the other side is a Republican practice only. The Democrats never do it. It reminds me of Winston Churchill’s statement about appeasers: they hope the crocodile will eat them last.

    8. PCD says:

      What hypocrites the Democrats are. You want to see a rabid Democrat run? Confront them with the facts about Earle, especially that the only Democrats Earle got indicted were Conservative Democrats Earle was personally fighting with. Doesn’t that change the picture of Earle? Does if you are a blind, paid for by Soros, partisan.

    9. eddie says:

      Simple question:

      For the sake of looking at this from a legal standapoint:

      Let’s assume that all of the facts asserted in the indictment are true.

      Do all of you here, and elsewhere, believe that if money was donated by a corporation to a national polictical committee that then turned around and “donated” the exact same amounts to several state legislators’ campaigns, in order to avoid the direct contribution by such corporation to such legislators’ campaigns (which is illegal under Texas law), that no crime would have been committed? Furthermore, does everyone here understand what a conspiracy legally entails: One must prove the acts were committed by one of the co-conspirators and that there was knowledge or some agreement among the co-conspirators.

      At least this prosecutor did not spend millions of dollars of tax payer money investigating a nickel and dime failed land deal which occurred years before the target held a federal position only to determine that there was not a crime. Remember that old saying about glass houses.

      But I understand that if you have a true believer, his sins are automatically forgiven (in fact there is the concerted effort to spin those sins as not really being sins at all, e.g. the Vicar of Voice, Mr. Limbaugh).

      But is it really worth the shared stench and dirty hands to support Mr. Delay, not because of this indictment but because he has repeatedly been the subject of nefarioius tactics that even the full congress has seen fit to sanction.

      Talk about willful blindness.

    10. Eddie,

      “Talk about willful blindness. ”

      The only “willfull blindness” I see here is your own. I’ve read and heard countless conservatives say that if Delay has done something wrong he should pay the price.

      As far as your comments about the land deal being investigated during Clinton’s term, that was just one of MANY scandals that plagued the Clinton administration (one which even some of my liberal friends say Hillary got away with the farm on) – remember Chinagate, for example? Probably the worst scandal of the lot, considering how it was basically a sellout to the Chinese in order to obtain campaign contributions.

    11. mlgsac says:

      Things I wish the Republican party would figure out:

      The left is not ever going to love you, so stop trying to “reach out” to them. Just deal with the fact that they need to be defeated.
      The MSM is never going to love you, see above
      You are the majority party. Act like it:
      Balance the freaking budget
      Nominate judges that uphold the Constitution instead of rewriting it
      Tell your liberal collegues (within the party) to tow the line or risk getting shutout of funds and support for reelection
      Some how, some way, get Condolezza Rice on the ticket for ‘08

    12. pst314 says:

      Francis W. Porretto wrote: “this business of sacrificing a troubled member to placate the other side is a Republican practice only. The Democrats never do it.”

      Except when faced with Commies, Arab fascists, Muslims. Oh wait–that’s not appeasement, that’s alliance.

    13. solitaire says:

      Looks like you were all, ugh, totally wrong, eh? :d
      The guy is guilty, was guilty, it was not some Dem plot, the problem with you guys is that you hang on to illusions until you are fairly drowning in reality and then, only then, do you stop spewing the lies.

    14. Baklava says:

      Convicting in the court of the press doesn’t make one guilty sol.

      If he is guilty who cares. It doesn’t shred conservative ideas/solutions/policies, etc.

      The problem with us guys (as you say) is we hang on to the knowlege that liberals are great with false allegations/accusations which extend to policy/budget/solutions/ideas. You will mischaracterize anything instead of listening to what we actually believe about our own ideas/solutions/policy. Why is that? Thriving on misinformation isn’t thriving at all. It’s suffering.

    15. solitaire says:

      Ok, so what do you believe about your “own ideas/solutions/policy” regarding campaign finance reform?
      I think, if I may, that if we could really get the bucks out of politics, it would resolve this country’s ills.