The Hammer comes down: DeLay convicted

  • Thread starter Thread starter gilliam
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Not that I like the guy, but life in prison? Even some first-degree murderers don’t get that much.
 
ProVobis said:
Not that I like the guy, but life in prison? Even some first-degree murderers don’t get that much.
Click to expand...
Yeah, it seems bizzare. Here in Texas, murder w/out aggravating circumstances will get you 5-10. I know some one convicted of running a meth lab out of his garage and he was out in 18 months (reduced from a 3 year sentance for good behavior and overcrowding allowance).
 
I thought that De Lay would beat the charges after the feds refused to bring charges against him. He seemed to have a good claim that it was just political – but that allegation did not work. DeLay just was in too tight with some shady lobbyists.
 
gilliam said:
The former House majority leader faces a sentence ranging from five years to life in prison.

politico.com/news/stories/1110/45594.html
Click to expand...
The range of prison times means very little. If it were Arkansas, and he got 5 years, which would have been most likely, he’d do less than 2, and probably get halfway house as a non-violent offender, for good behavior, and to reserve the prison for violent types. I don’t think that Texas is much different. Had it been a federal rap, he’d have been out of luck as there’s no parole from federal lock-ups.
 
Beau_Ouiville said:
I thought that De Lay would beat the charges after the feds refused to bring charges against him. He seemed to have a good claim that it was just political – but that allegation did not work. DeLay just was in too tight with some shady lobbyists.
Click to expand...
No one really expected him to be found innocent by an Austin Jury-they would give him the death penalty merely for being a republican if they could. This will be tossed out on appeal.
 
EmperorNapoleon said:
Aside from money laundering?
Click to expand...
He didnt. Like I said it will be thrown out on appeal. He should have been allowed to move the trial out of Austin-instead he faced a highly partisan judge and a highly partisan jury. ALL Americans should be disturbed by this verdict in that it is moving us further down the road of criminalizing political differences.

I will admit to having a soft spot for Delay. For those of us involved in the pro-life ministry in Ft Bend County he was a true champion. He always had time to speak at our fundraisers and he and his wife walked the the talk-they have adopted several special needs children. He inspired many to fight for the rights of the unborn-his fundraising gave us the means to spread our message far and wide.

There is no dounbt that had Delay done what he did for Democrats Ronnie Earl would never have bought charges. In fact he would have probably have recieved an award from the Travis County Democrat Party. Bear in mind many of charges were thrown out early on.
 
EmperorNapoleon said:
He illegally funneled corporate donations to Republican candidates in Texas. He’s guilty.
Click to expand...
Like the partisans in Austin you find him guilty because you dont like his politics. It will be overturned once it is considered by an impartial judge. In light of the USSC “Citizen United” decision it is doubtful he broke the law even if he did what Earle claimed he did.
Do you have any basis for that allegation?
Click to expand...
You are aware that Ronnie Earle shopped the charges to 6 different grand juries befoe he could fnd one that would indict Delay? This was a partisan witchhunt from day one.
 
Beau_Ouiville said:
Tossed out on what grounds? In your opinion.
Click to expand...
Code: 
 So, the "Hammer" did not STEAL any money, he took no bribe, he didn't bribe anyone else, such as the boys on the barstools on Election Day, and he didn't accept illegal foreign monies. At worst, he transferred money from HIS organization, and ran commercials to try to CONVINCE people to vote for select local candidates. To me, it's the prosecutor who should be jailed for harassment, and the jurors should be convicted of either political vindictiveness or stupidity. His team should have made certain that conservatives were included on the jury.
 It seems as if laws are created only to have something to use to intimidate and club Republicans! Another easy example would be the proscription against political preaching in churches. Everyone knows that it takes place in black churches across the land, with nary a whimper by authorities. Yet, any church that overtly supports conservatives would come under fire immediately. :rolleyes: Rob
 
estesbob said:
Like the partisans in Austin you find him guilty because you dont like his politics. It will be overturned once it is considered by an impartial judge. In light of the USSC “Citizen United” decision it is doubtful he broke the law even if he did what Earle claimed he did.
Click to expand...
The Citizen United decision doesn’t apply here. We’re talking about campaign contribution not paid advertisements.
estesbob said:
You are aware that Ronnie Earle shopped the charges to 6 different grand juries befoe he could fnd one that would indict Delay? This was a partisan witchhunt from day one.
Click to expand...
As Earle said, "Being called partisan and vindictive by Tom DeLay is like being called ugly by a frog.” I’d hardly consider Earle to be a partisan individual. He’s sought indictments against 12 Democrats since 1976 and only 4 Republicans.
 
RACJ said:
At worst, he transferred money from HIS organization, and ran commercials to try to CONVINCE people to vote for select local candidates.
Click to expand...
He funneled corporate donations through the RNC to the campaign coffers of Republican candidates.
 
Is the death penalty on the table? Obviously, funneling Rebublican campaign contributions through Republican PACs to support Republican candidates should be punishable by death. A good, old fashioned hanging is in order. :rolleyes:
 
rlg94086 said:
Obviously, funneling Rebublican campaign contributions through Republican PACs to support Republican candidates should be punishable by death. A good, old fashioned hanging is in order. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
It’s a violation of Texas State election law for a corporation to donate money to political candidates and by taking corporate donations, giving it to the RNC with a list of Texan Republican candidates specificying how much should go to whom; he is guilty of violating State election law and money laundering.
 
EmperorNapoleon said:
It’s a violation of Texas State election law for a corporation to donate money to political candidates and by taking corporate donations, giving it to the RNC with a list of Texan Republican candidates specificying how much should go to whom; he is guilty of violating State election law and money laundering.
Click to expand...
Did I question the charges? Your reply has nothing to do with my post. 🤷
 
EmperorNapoleon said:
The Citizen United decision doesn’t apply here. We’re talking about campaign contribution not paid advertisements.

As Earle said, "Being called partisan and vindictive by Tom DeLay is like being called ugly by a frog.” I’d hardly consider Earle to be a partisan individual. He’s sought indictments against 12 Democrats since 1976 and only 4 Republicans.
Click to expand...
Thank you for making my point.

The Delay jury had exactly one republican on it which is not surprising given the trial was held in travis county.
 
rlg94086 said:
Did I question the charges?
Click to expand...
Not charges; factual occurances.
estesbob said:
Thank you for making my point.
Click to expand...
How does an unpartisan record prove partisanship?
estesbob said:
The Delay jury had exactly one republican on it which is not surprising given the trial was held in travis county.
Click to expand...
And it deliberated for 19 hours before reaching a verdict. Hardly a sign of a politically motivated verdict. And so what if the jury only had one republican on it. That doesn’t prove that the verdict was politically motivated either. If Delay and his lawyer were so concerned about the political makeup of the jury then should have voiced those concerns during jury selection and made peremptory challenges.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top