Paul Maurer 2
Well-Known Member
If I had as many "ethical lapses" I would have lost my medical license years ago. He needs a good lashing from that bullwhip on his wall.
Tom Delay indicted
- Thread starter Paul Maurer 2
- Start date
Help Support Ford SportTrac Forum:
Kevin Palmer
Well-Known Member
Gee, what a surprise....
Eric Pennal
Well-Known Member
:lol::lol::lol:Deleted deleted
Well-Known Member
Where's all the 'brothas' from the conservative camp now?
John Mastrocco
Active Member
Let's see... Texas as a state is so Republican these days that when the Democrats want to make their voices heard they run to Oklahoma in protest.
Yep. Sounds like partisan politics to me.
He's been indicted. If he was a Democrat the conservatives would be calling for his immediate resignation as Majority Leader in the House, if not his seat. The House rules used to (still do?) cover an indictment in your home state, but last time I heard the Republicans were trying to change those rules to protect Delay. Not sure what the final outcome was - it was too much politics even for me. And, yes, the Democrats would have been scrambling to do the same thing. But they weren't the ones to get the rule enacted to begin with, the Republicans fought for it when the Dems controlled the Congress and certain House Members from Illinois and Ohio(??) were facing some legal issues.
Personally, I think he should step down as majority leader until this matter is settled. But not give up his seat until he is convicted - if that even happens.
Yep. Sounds like partisan politics to me.
He's been indicted. If he was a Democrat the conservatives would be calling for his immediate resignation as Majority Leader in the House, if not his seat. The House rules used to (still do?) cover an indictment in your home state, but last time I heard the Republicans were trying to change those rules to protect Delay. Not sure what the final outcome was - it was too much politics even for me. And, yes, the Democrats would have been scrambling to do the same thing. But they weren't the ones to get the rule enacted to begin with, the Republicans fought for it when the Dems controlled the Congress and certain House Members from Illinois and Ohio(??) were facing some legal issues.
Personally, I think he should step down as majority leader until this matter is settled. But not give up his seat until he is convicted - if that even happens.
user 62785
Member
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2005
- Messages
- 66
- Reaction score
- 0
Is Delay guilty? Most likely so.
Want proof then I ask you consider that he's been warned over ethics violations 3 times in the last year alone. The icing on the cake came late last year when House Republicans strong-armed a rule into effect that repealed a previous rule requiring House leaders to step aside if indicted. The rule was quickly repealed after the first of the year when some began to worry about a backlash from their constituents. This rule, by the way, conveniently came right after three of Delay's associates were indicted. Convenient, eh?
Its sadly unlikely that anything will come of the Delay's indictment however. After all having the sitting President as a personal friend likely has some perks.
And with Republican Senator Bill Frist also fighting ethics problems one wonders what the Republican National Committee must be thinking. Oh wait... my perception of most politicians is that they believe they have immunity from the laws that the rest of us have to follow. :wacko:
Want proof then I ask you consider that he's been warned over ethics violations 3 times in the last year alone. The icing on the cake came late last year when House Republicans strong-armed a rule into effect that repealed a previous rule requiring House leaders to step aside if indicted. The rule was quickly repealed after the first of the year when some began to worry about a backlash from their constituents. This rule, by the way, conveniently came right after three of Delay's associates were indicted. Convenient, eh?
Its sadly unlikely that anything will come of the Delay's indictment however. After all having the sitting President as a personal friend likely has some perks.
And with Republican Senator Bill Frist also fighting ethics problems one wonders what the Republican National Committee must be thinking. Oh wait... my perception of most politicians is that they believe they have immunity from the laws that the rest of us have to follow. :wacko:
Eric Pennal
Well-Known Member
Exactly, Martimus.
Even though partisan politics may be involved - that doesn't mean DeLay is innocent.
Even though partisan politics may be involved - that doesn't mean DeLay is innocent.
TomT
Well-Known Member
Delay guilty? Probably. Find me a politician thats not guilty of something and I will eat my Trac!
Oh and just to set the record straight, just because Delay is from Sugar Land and I live in Sugar Land, and his first name is Tom and my first name is Tom, there is no relationship!!!!
Oh and just to set the record straight, just because Delay is from Sugar Land and I live in Sugar Land, and his first name is Tom and my first name is Tom, there is no relationship!!!!
Eric Pennal
Well-Known Member
If your alias was "TomD", I'd be pretty suspicious.
When was the lat time you saw a politician go to jail ??? They are above the law! The problem is that because of partisan politics, they are always going to be accused of lying or doing somthine wrong, so they may as well do it and everyone will think it's just more mud raking by their opponents.
The ethic laws of the Congress and the Senate are a joke! The majority of them are lawyers and can twist the laws to suit there own agenda.
Tom Delay has been accused of violating Election Laws and has been indicted by the Travis County DA. I have never heard of anyone in Texas ever being convicted and jailed forf violating any Election Laws, and believe me there have been plenty of obvious "Good Old Boy" violations.
...Rich
The ethic laws of the Congress and the Senate are a joke! The majority of them are lawyers and can twist the laws to suit there own agenda.
Tom Delay has been accused of violating Election Laws and has been indicted by the Travis County DA. I have never heard of anyone in Texas ever being convicted and jailed forf violating any Election Laws, and believe me there have been plenty of obvious "Good Old Boy" violations.
...Rich
John Mastrocco
Active Member
Rich,
He was indicted by a Grand Jury - not the DA. Slight difference, but at least it was people that made the final decision and not some DA. Not sure how much control the DA has over the Grand Jury process, but it was still 12 citizens (And the Grand Jury Foreman is an ex-County Sheriff from somewhere in Texas.)
IF he did break the law, maybe this time a politician will go to jail.
Yeah, I know - pie in the sky dreamer. But, HEY! It has to happen sooner or later.
(Of course, he has to really be guilty, first.)
:lol:
He was indicted by a Grand Jury - not the DA. Slight difference, but at least it was people that made the final decision and not some DA. Not sure how much control the DA has over the Grand Jury process, but it was still 12 citizens (And the Grand Jury Foreman is an ex-County Sheriff from somewhere in Texas.)
IF he did break the law, maybe this time a politician will go to jail.
Yeah, I know - pie in the sky dreamer. But, HEY! It has to happen sooner or later.
(Of course, he has to really be guilty, first.)
:lol:
Ryan Schaecher
Well-Known Member
If he broke the law, send his ass to the slammer. No question.
But first things first-
1) He has only been accused of breaking the law
2) He was indicted by a grand jury, so was OJ Simpson, Michael Jackson and Berretta
3) The DA has been known to play these type of games before to try and knock down a promenent republican (see Kay Bailey Hutcheson who was indicted, then acquitted of all charges this same DA brought up).
4) Getting a grand jury indictment is relatively easy versus getting a conviction
As far as him stepping down -
He has temporarily, that is until this indictment is cleared either by acquittal or being found guilty. An indictment is not a sentance of guilt, but rather a probe into guilt. It's like saying "You've been drinking, and you've been driving, but I don't know if they have been driving drunk, but we're going to investigate if you have". This DA has come on record saying in front of the Texas State Democratic Party that he "will be the one that takes Delay down". Yep, sounds like he's looking for the truth like he supposed to be.
Crime and Politics go together like peanut butter and jelly. Frank Lautenburg (D) found out the hard way he was not above the law. But his hairpiece was....
Rocco-
You're right about the Rep's trying to change the rules. They were looking at it because this DA had tried 6 times to get Delay on charges, and the rules were lax in defining what was and was not covered in the requirement to step aside. I agree that they should have just left it alone as it looked like they were trying to change the laws to protect one of their own (which was the case, but at the same time they were trying to close loop holes for the oposition to use to slander the leadership of the other side now and in the future, but that was never covered by the press).
I am not defending them at all, if he's guilty he will go away. But someone also needs to look into the actions of the DA and see what's up with him.
But first things first-
1) He has only been accused of breaking the law
2) He was indicted by a grand jury, so was OJ Simpson, Michael Jackson and Berretta
3) The DA has been known to play these type of games before to try and knock down a promenent republican (see Kay Bailey Hutcheson who was indicted, then acquitted of all charges this same DA brought up).
4) Getting a grand jury indictment is relatively easy versus getting a conviction
As far as him stepping down -
He has temporarily, that is until this indictment is cleared either by acquittal or being found guilty. An indictment is not a sentance of guilt, but rather a probe into guilt. It's like saying "You've been drinking, and you've been driving, but I don't know if they have been driving drunk, but we're going to investigate if you have". This DA has come on record saying in front of the Texas State Democratic Party that he "will be the one that takes Delay down". Yep, sounds like he's looking for the truth like he supposed to be.
Crime and Politics go together like peanut butter and jelly. Frank Lautenburg (D) found out the hard way he was not above the law. But his hairpiece was....
Rocco-
You're right about the Rep's trying to change the rules. They were looking at it because this DA had tried 6 times to get Delay on charges, and the rules were lax in defining what was and was not covered in the requirement to step aside. I agree that they should have just left it alone as it looked like they were trying to change the laws to protect one of their own (which was the case, but at the same time they were trying to close loop holes for the oposition to use to slander the leadership of the other side now and in the future, but that was never covered by the press).
I am not defending them at all, if he's guilty he will go away. But someone also needs to look into the actions of the DA and see what's up with him.
John Mastrocco
Active Member
Shek,
You'll get no argument from on any of your points. I was glad to see him step down as Majority Leader as it was the right thing to do. And we'll see what the courts eventually say about his guilt. Until then, I reserve judgement, as I do in all criminal cases.
Politics in the USA aren't as dirty as they were in the 19th Century, but we sure seem to be headed back in that direction the last couple of decades.
You'll get no argument from on any of your points. I was glad to see him step down as Majority Leader as it was the right thing to do. And we'll see what the courts eventually say about his guilt. Until then, I reserve judgement, as I do in all criminal cases.
Politics in the USA aren't as dirty as they were in the 19th Century, but we sure seem to be headed back in that direction the last couple of decades.
Last edited by a moderator:
Rocco,
You are correct that it was the Grand Jury that indited him, but I also know that a Grand Jury inditement can me misleading. Only the DA presents evidenct, and there are rarely any actual witnesses testifying. All the DA does is lays out his evidence and the Grand Jury determines if that evidence indicates that a law may have been broken.
When and if it ever gets to trial, much of the evidence may be thrown out or gotten from unreliable sources and the case goes out the window
The DA has been going after Delay for years and I think there may be enough evidence to show that the whole investigation has been polically motivated. Even if Delay did it and is found guilty, it is still politics in action and he will not serve one day in jail. Other less significant co-conspiritors may go to jail, but in the end they won't be able to directly prove that Delay was involved, even if he was the ringleader!
By the time the trial comes up the President and the Texas Govenor will be due to leave office and Delay will just get a pardon and it will be over. Just poitics as usual
...Rich
You are correct that it was the Grand Jury that indited him, but I also know that a Grand Jury inditement can me misleading. Only the DA presents evidenct, and there are rarely any actual witnesses testifying. All the DA does is lays out his evidence and the Grand Jury determines if that evidence indicates that a law may have been broken.
When and if it ever gets to trial, much of the evidence may be thrown out or gotten from unreliable sources and the case goes out the window
The DA has been going after Delay for years and I think there may be enough evidence to show that the whole investigation has been polically motivated. Even if Delay did it and is found guilty, it is still politics in action and he will not serve one day in jail. Other less significant co-conspiritors may go to jail, but in the end they won't be able to directly prove that Delay was involved, even if he was the ringleader!
By the time the trial comes up the President and the Texas Govenor will be due to leave office and Delay will just get a pardon and it will be over. Just poitics as usual
...Rich
John Mastrocco
Active Member
You are correct, of course. He may never even see trial. And if he does, will he ever pay a single dime in fines or see a day of jail? I doubt it as well. It's all poliics.
Deleted deleted
Well-Known Member
Guess they need to get the same judge that thought Martha Stewart deserved jail time.
