Haven't read the indictment yet, but I am having trouble figuring out how corporate funds channeled through a PAC to a candidate constitutes money laundering, a term which up until now I thought meant taking monies that are generated from illegal activities and "cleaning them up" by pushing them through legitimate business activities.

Maybe it's just me.

Indicted on a different charge for the same transaction.

I don't think this is going to fly in court.

If this really is a witch hunt, then there some be some serious consequences on this Earle character. And Delay is just the one to do it.

Ronnie will get away with this hit job just like the last ones. They won't lay a glove on him.

Money laundering is defined as a way of transfering money from person (or group) A to person B though a third party C in such a way that if the money had been transfered from A to B directly, it would violate some written law. Laundering money generated by criminal activities is slightly different, since in that case A has obtained the money illegally in the first place.

Check out the Texas campaign finance laws if you'd like and you'd see how it is POSSIBLE for someone to break them.

You can keep believing that this is a witch hunt or whatever, but when the facts come out, well if they come out, would you want to be known as someone who blindly supported a corrupted politician? It's best to reserve judgements for the moment. It's bad enough having Tom DeLay himself come out on the deffensive in the media contradicting his own laywer. His behaviour in Washington is nothing conservatives should be prooud of, he acts more like Putin than anyone else.

Corruption in government shouldn't be a partisan issue. As far as I know it is not a conservative value of any form and it is good that many conservatives (coincidently, the ones that aren't involved that much in Washington) are taking the allegations seriosly.

If it turns out he did break the law, then we all win, unless of course you're ok with high-level corruption in our government. And if it turns out the charges were fabricated, than big deal, that's why we have trials and defense and so forth.

Not sure if this is the same offense that Delay is accused of, but it is interesting to note that Pelosi is allowed to simply issue a mea culpa, pay a fine, and all is well.

They all be crooks

Interesting reflections on this latest charge over at Powerline
Something Stinks In Texas

Uh, J, that's not how "money laundering" is defined here in Texas.

Don't know how it's defined there, and I pretty much don't give a shit cause Delay is being charged with an offense in Texas.

I'm not defending Delay - don't know if he did anything wrong or not. But I've watched Ronnie Earle most of my adult life and he's a sneaky partisan bastard who's used his office before to score political points.

So, after reading Dave's link to the TX statues, are we in a circular pair of indictments?

Money Laundering requires criminal activity -> which is provided by the Conspiracy charge.

The Conspiracy charge is an attempt to conceal... Money Laundering.

Delightful.

J's definition of corruption is as elastic and tendentious as his definition of money laundering.

Earle is alleging, at most, a possible technical violation of Texas campaign finance law, by means of a commonplace tactic employed nationwide by both Democrats and Republicans.

It's a shit indictment.

When you convene a grand jury at noon and have an indictment by the close of the day, it doesn't smell right. Couple that with the fact that DeLay's name wasn't even mentioned in the original indictment except to say that he was indicted and that his lawyer filed an appeal challenging the validity of the original indictment on the same day, and you have some extremely suspicious activity on the part of the prosecutor.

I like the rationaliztion here. J says we ought to just let it play out since maybe we can unseat a crooked politician. I have a suggestion for him--maybe we can get your ass indicted on some flimsy-ass charge like this, you can get yourself an expensive lawyer and tell folks at work you're going to be out for your trial and tell your kids a prosecutor thinks you're a crook.

That's an easy sell--more prosecutors using their office to sniff out corruption. What's not so easy is coming to terms with the ramifications of that kind of prosecutorial power. Nice piece of thinking, J!

spongeworthy,

First of all the charge isn't flimsy - it deals with campaign finance and ensuring that elections are free and fair is way too important for that charge to be called flimsy. If Earle's case is weak and baseless or whatever as DeLay claims, then I am sure his lawyers will be able to convince a judge that that is the case.

When you're in a position of power everything you do will be watched by those who want to unseat you. All hell broke lose when Clinton got a BJ (which by the way has absolutely no impact on our lives or our elections), but when someone is accused of actually breaking laws dealing with political campaign financing, you dismiss it as partisan hacking. Sure Early might be a hack, but he's busted way more Democrats than Republicans, and regardless of that, DeLay should have either been smarter in pimping the system or he should stayed within the safety zone. If you're not smart enough to break the rules without getting caught, then you probably shouldn't.

"Clinton got a BJ (which by the way has absolutely no impact on our lives or our elections)"

I beg to differ. Scenario: Bill's about to get his nut when the Russki's launch a nuclear strike. The military man carrying the 'football' doesn't realize Bill's screaming for the launch codes. Poof! Bye bye, U.S. of A.

Just to put in, Slick Willy did NOT get impeached and disbarred for getting his Willy Slicked; he committed perjury, which is relevant to the business of governing. The Dems should have forced him to resign and we wouldn't be having all these problems we've been having.

Not only did he purjure himself, he did it as a sitting Pres in order to deny a sexual harassment claimant her fair day in court. You might as well say that a a mugging is "just about sex" as long as the perp blew the cash on hookers. But then again, libs seem so distracted by anything sexual that I wouldn't put it past them to buy that argument.

J, Stop waving your hands in the air and running around in circles. You can't manage simple definitions and you don't know a damn thing about the charges or the case. Pompous posturing and vague hysterical bullshit don't fool anybody.