Delay...A Frivolous Politician
House Majority Leader Tom DeLay(R -Tex.) has been much in the news lately. Three of his associates and eight corporations are under felony indictment in Texas after evidence of money laundering and unlawfully accepting campaign contributions was presented to the grand jury. The money in question was funneled into the campaign coffers of Republican candidates for the Texas legislature in 2002. The ensuing election resulted in a Republican majority and cleared the way for a controversial mid-census redistricting of the state’s congressional districts.
At the center of the controversy is TRMPAC or Texans for a Republican Majority Political Action Committee. Modeled after Tom DeLay’s ARMPAC, or Americans for a Republican Majority, the PAC sought to raise funds to support Republican candidates for state legislature. Tom DeLay served on the board and was actively involved in fundraising efforts, though he claims not to have any knowledge of the committee’s finances. Allegedly, TRMPAC solicited contributions from corporate donors, routed the money to the Republican National Committee, and then returned to legislative candidates as individual donations. Under Texas law, donations from corporations and labor unions to legislative candidates are forbidden.
Though DeLay has not yet been indicted, Republicans began circling their wagons last week with a vote to modify their caucus rules. The caucus rules, part of the Contract with America, called leaders to relinquish their positions if they came under criminal indictment. These rules were originally established to distinguish Republicans as being morally responsible, or having higher "moral values" than Democrats do.
Given the importance "moral values" might have played in this year’s presidential election, many Democrats are now looking at this scandal and subsequent rule change as a fortuitous turn of events. Fortunately for Republicans, it is early in the election cycle and a number of new "O.J. -Peterson" trials will in all likelihood remove this scandal from the public memory by 2006.
Permit me, if you would, to rant about this for a minute. What I find most reprehensible about this story, isn't the changing of the rules, but the spin. DeLay and his cohorts are taking every public opportunity to claim their rule change is in response to "frivolous" indictments.
These same people, if the roles were reversed and a Democrat was threatened with a felony indictment, would be talking about "moral values" which was the reason for the rule in the first place (Newt and the Contract on America).
Instead, they cast a shadow over the entire legal system by bandying about the term "frivolous". The American people now have a Pavlovian response to this word after enduring years of Republican campaigns to limit damages awarded in class-action lawsuits (don’t get me started on that one).
I find it dangerous and irresponsible to carry this term over to a felony grand jury indictment. The grand jury is an integral part of our legal system. As a safeguard against unwarranted prosecution, the grand jury insures indictments are not filed without sufficient evidence.
A Texas grand jury, made up of at least twelve citizens, has found sufficient evidence that three of Tom DeLay’s associates and eight companies have broken the law. This is not "frivolous" nor is it "politics of personal destruction". These are serious allegations of money laundering and the channeling of corporate money into Texas elections.
This is not a partisan issue. The attempt to classify it as such is despicable. The use of terms like "politics of personal destruction" and "frivolous indictments" should be exposed for what they really are, Tom DeLay’s attempt to evade responsibility for his actions. If he truly were innocent of any criminal wrongdoing, DeLay would be better served by embracing the criminal justice system in his home state instead of slandering it in the national media.
On a side note, I noticed my congressman, Elton Gallegly (R. California 24th District) recently donated $5,ooo to the Tom Delay Legal Expense Trust. The money came out of his campaign fund not his personal finances. Is that legal, or ethical? I’d love to hear your thoughts.
At the center of the controversy is TRMPAC or Texans for a Republican Majority Political Action Committee. Modeled after Tom DeLay’s ARMPAC, or Americans for a Republican Majority, the PAC sought to raise funds to support Republican candidates for state legislature. Tom DeLay served on the board and was actively involved in fundraising efforts, though he claims not to have any knowledge of the committee’s finances. Allegedly, TRMPAC solicited contributions from corporate donors, routed the money to the Republican National Committee, and then returned to legislative candidates as individual donations. Under Texas law, donations from corporations and labor unions to legislative candidates are forbidden.
Though DeLay has not yet been indicted, Republicans began circling their wagons last week with a vote to modify their caucus rules. The caucus rules, part of the Contract with America, called leaders to relinquish their positions if they came under criminal indictment. These rules were originally established to distinguish Republicans as being morally responsible, or having higher "moral values" than Democrats do.
Given the importance "moral values" might have played in this year’s presidential election, many Democrats are now looking at this scandal and subsequent rule change as a fortuitous turn of events. Fortunately for Republicans, it is early in the election cycle and a number of new "O.J. -Peterson" trials will in all likelihood remove this scandal from the public memory by 2006.
Permit me, if you would, to rant about this for a minute. What I find most reprehensible about this story, isn't the changing of the rules, but the spin. DeLay and his cohorts are taking every public opportunity to claim their rule change is in response to "frivolous" indictments.
These same people, if the roles were reversed and a Democrat was threatened with a felony indictment, would be talking about "moral values" which was the reason for the rule in the first place (Newt and the Contract on America).
Instead, they cast a shadow over the entire legal system by bandying about the term "frivolous". The American people now have a Pavlovian response to this word after enduring years of Republican campaigns to limit damages awarded in class-action lawsuits (don’t get me started on that one).
I find it dangerous and irresponsible to carry this term over to a felony grand jury indictment. The grand jury is an integral part of our legal system. As a safeguard against unwarranted prosecution, the grand jury insures indictments are not filed without sufficient evidence.
A Texas grand jury, made up of at least twelve citizens, has found sufficient evidence that three of Tom DeLay’s associates and eight companies have broken the law. This is not "frivolous" nor is it "politics of personal destruction". These are serious allegations of money laundering and the channeling of corporate money into Texas elections.
This is not a partisan issue. The attempt to classify it as such is despicable. The use of terms like "politics of personal destruction" and "frivolous indictments" should be exposed for what they really are, Tom DeLay’s attempt to evade responsibility for his actions. If he truly were innocent of any criminal wrongdoing, DeLay would be better served by embracing the criminal justice system in his home state instead of slandering it in the national media.
On a side note, I noticed my congressman, Elton Gallegly (R. California 24th District) recently donated $5,ooo to the Tom Delay Legal Expense Trust. The money came out of his campaign fund not his personal finances. Is that legal, or ethical? I’d love to hear your thoughts.
posted by CitizenPundit at 7:01 PM
1 Comments:
DeLay is a scumbag! He should be run out of office and placed in a 6x10 cell as an example to all those other corrupt Washington insiders.
Post a Comment
<< Home