Quoted: I'm looking around the general discussion board but there haven't been too many furious rants about Delay and the coming charges against Rove. Do you guys pick and chose your battles or what?
|
They're laughable and complete bullshit. First Earle tried to accuse DeLay of breaking a law in 2002 that wasn't passed until 2003. That's called ex post facto and so unjust it's written into the Constitution as something the government can't do against its citizens in the Bill of Rights.
So Earle says "Oh yeah, right, forgot about that" and rewrites his charge as "money laundering". Money laundering is disguising the source of ill-gotten money, but again, the money DeLay raised wasn't illegal.
Then the foreman of the grand jury that determines if the charges against DeLay were worthy of the trial explicitly said on a talk radio show interview he made up his mind DeLay was guilty by watching anti-DeLay ads, not from any sort of evidence that was brought up in the grand jury.
So the case against DeLay has so many both procedural and substantial holes in it it looks like swiss cheese. I know you think he's guilty, but his real crime in the eyes of his prosecutors is that DeLay is not on their team.