DeLay booked, smiles in mugshot to send message

Posted by: ST on October 21, 2005 at 8:41 am

Via AP:

DeLay Smile May Foil Democrat Campaign Ads

Why is Tom DeLay smiling? After all, he’s been indicted. Forced out of his job as House majority leader. And called into court for fingerprinting and a mugshot like a common criminal.

Answer: A photo of DeLay grinning from ear to ear doesn’t pack quite the punch in a Democratic attack ad as one that looks more like the mugshot of, say, actor Hugh Grant.

Note the House of Representatives security pin on DeLay’s lapel.

He looks in the photo like a proud member of Congress who might just have won the lottery, not one indicted on charges of money laundering. The photo looks like it could have been taken anywhere.

And that was just the point.

[...]

For his mandatory booking Thursday, which caused him to miss voting on a gun industry bill popular in his home state, DeLay did everything he could to prevent images of the event from being committed to film.

Rather, the photo projects the confidence DeLay exhibits in all of his scuffles. For anyone who didn’t get it, DeLay’s lawyer, Dick DeGuerin, articulated the message it was intended to send.

“If you saw Congressman DeLay’s mugshot, he was smiling,” DeGuerin told reporters. “He’s eager and he’s ready to go.”

Heh.

RSS feed for comments on this post.

7 Responses to “DeLay booked, smiles in mugshot to send message”

Comments

  1. Lokki says:

    I can just HEAR Teddy Kennedy muttering

    Coises! Foiled AGAIN !

  2. PCD says:

    This is not going, nor is it going to go the Democrats’ way. Earle and the Judge are going to find themselves sanctioned for being such partisan fools.

  3. PCD says:

    Just to make my position crystal clear even to the moonbats, if a judge donates to ANY group that has anything to do for or against a defendant, or takes money from trial lawyers, DAs, or defendants before them, they should remove themselves from the case or be impeached. I even mean this for a judge hearing a drunk driving case against Ted Kennedy

  4. Bachbone says:

    Isn’t one of the reasons you are asked all those questions, before joining a jury, to get rid of anyone with a suspected bias? Ought not it be applied to judges, as well? Everyone has biases to some extent, even if it’s for banana splits rather than sundaes. Someone who claims, as does the elitist MSM, that (s)he is completely unbiased is lying or an egocentric dunderhead.

  5. Melissa in Texas says:

    This entire thing with Ronnie Earl and his bogus indictment is going to blow up in Earl’s face.

    Earl is a solid, through and through flaming democrat. or democrap as my 14 year old son calls em

    Hopefully, this will place just enough egg on Earl’s face that he will get booted out of office in the next election.

    He had to go after someone with a big name to get attention.

    Earl filed on DeLay in Travis County, where Earl holds court and not Fort Bend County, where DeLay is based out of.

    According to the State, Earl should have filed on DeLay in his home county, in which case, the grand jury never would have even considered a case that has no proof!

    Austin, which I am ashamed to say, is one of the most liberal cities in Texas. The good ol’ boy system runs deep and Earl is firmly ensconsed with the liberal quackers.

    I do believe the change of venue will occur and I for one, cannot wait to see old Ronnie fall on his face like he did with Kay Bailey Hutchinson!

    I am cheering DeLay on and absolutley loved the “mugshot” that wasn’t!

  6. Baklava says:

    You go MIT!

  7. Baklava says:

    This isn’t over yet?

    What is in the link?
    This:
    Having trouble figuring out all this Tom DeLay stuff? Well, here’s the gist of the allegations:

    I. Spending corporate money in politics is illegal in Texas, but not most places.
    II. DeLay raised corporate money in Texas, but didn’t spend it.
    III. DeLay sent the corporate money to Washington.
    IV. Washington sent a different amount of non-corporate money to Texas at a later date.
    V. This “laundered” money was spent on state races in 2002.
    VI. This was a particularly important election because it led to the long overdue redistricting of Texas to finally reflect the political ideology and partisan affiliation of most Texans.