The Discerning Texan

Easily the most comprehensive coverage I have found on the Web regarding the "indictment" of Tom DeLay was at Michelle Malkin's site. My take is that Earle knows he will not get a conviction: after all 5 previous grand jury panels looking at the same evidence refused to do indict DeLay. And his track record isn't exactly stellar on landing high-profile "big fish." Still, for Earle, the 6th time was a charm (except for the taxpayers of Travis County, who have been paying for over two years for this witch hunt--one that is remains highly likely to end up short of a conviction).

But the thing that must be said here, is this is not about getting a conviction, this is about an out of control DA's ego obsessed with getting even with a political enemy--and especially about doing damage to DeLay's reputation as a mid-term election heats up. Malkin and I are in agreement that this will not help the Republicans in the short term. However we are also in agreement that this thing will likely get tossed out before it ever gets to trial. The people of Austin should hide their heads in shame for electing this yahoo.

As to the sorry excuse for an "indictment" itself, Mark Levin (author of the most excellent "Men In Black", about the current state of the Supreme Court) shared his thoughts:

Here's my first take on this indictment (I've only read the indictment and nothing more for now): The indictment is three pages in length. Other than a statement that "one or more" of 3 individuals, including Tom DeLay, entered into an illegal conspiracy, I can't find a single sentence tying Tom DeLay to a crime. That is, there's not a single sentence tying DeLay to the contribution. The indictment describes the alleged conduct of two other individuals, but nothing about DeLay. You would think if Ronnie Earle had even a thin reed of testimony linking DeLay to the contribution, it would have been noted in the indictment to justify the grand jury's action. Moreover, not only is there no information about DeLay committing acts in furtherance of a conspiracy, there's no information about DeLay entering into a conspiracy. I honestly believe that unless there's more, this is an egregious abuse of prosecutorial power. It's a disgrace. I understand that not everything has to be contained in an indictment, but how about something!

Malkin's comprehensive analysis deals heavily with the "Truth" aspect, via an email to her us by Barbara Comstock, formerly of the Department of Justice:

Ronnie Earle argues that Tom DeLay conspired to make a contribution to a political party in violation of the Texas Election Code. There was no contribution to a political party in violation of the Texas Election Code. There was no conspiracy. Ronnie Earle is wrong on the facts. Ronnie Earle is wrong on the law.

According to the indictment, the conspiracy was to unlawfully make a political contribution of corporate funds to a political party within 60 days of an election.

The Texas Election Code clearly states that "A corporation or labor organization may not knowingly make a contribution [to a political party] during a period beginning on the 60th day before the date of a general election for state and county officers and continuing through the day of the election." Title 15, Texas Election Code, § 253.104. Texas law also states in part that "A person commits criminal conspiracy if, with intent that a felony be committed: (1) he agrees with one or more persons that they or one or more of them engage in conduct that would constitute the offense; and (2) he or one or more of them performs an overt act in pursuance of the agreement."

The Problems with Earle's case:

In an effort to contrive jurisdiction over DeLay, Earle charges that because Congressman DeLay may have known about the transaction before it occurred, he was then part of a conspiracy.

However, Earle's office has sworn testimony and other exculpatory evidence showing that Congressman DeLay did not have knowledge of the transaction.

In addition:

No corporation or labor organization was indicted in this conspiracy. Neither Jim Ellis nor John Colyandro is a corporation or labor organization.

No corporation or labor organization made a contribution during 60 days of an election.

What constitutes a contribution under the Texas Election Code is not strictly defined.

Neither the RNC nor RNSEC constitute a political party under Texas election law. They are considered PACs, just as the DNC is.

Corporations in Texas could have legally made contributions to the RNC or RNSEC during the period in question under Texas election law.

There was no violation of the Texas Election Code. There was no conspiracy. The underlying transaction was legal. Had corporations sent money directly to the RNC or RNSEC, the transaction would be legal. How could anyone conspire to do indirectly what could legally have been done directly?

Ronnie Earle has a history of using his office for attacks on his political and personal enemies.

·"The Travis County, Texas, prosecutor investigating Mr. DeLay has a history of using his office for partisan ends."(Congressional prerogative, The Washington Times, November 19, 2004)

·Earle has demonstrated a past zeal for indicting conservative figures and even liberals with whom he has personal or professional disagreements. (Target: DeLay, National Review, April 11, 2005)

Earle's partisan prosecutions - which have frequently failed - are designed for political harm, not legal harm. Earle is the same partisan prosecutor who politically indicted and failed to convict:

Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison
Conservative Democrat Bob Bullock (when he was Comptroller - later he was Lt. Governor)
Democrat Attorney General Jim Mattox

Ronnie Earle's three year political vendetta against Rep. DeLay has been marked by:

Illegal grand jury leaks,
A fundraising speech by Earle for the Texas Democrat party that inappropriately focused on the investigation,
Misuse of his office for partisan purposes, and
Extortion of money for Earle's pet projects from corporations in exchange for dismissing indictments he brought against them.

Ronnie Earle has been frequently criticized for his methods:

The Dallas Morning News criticized Earle in the Hutchison case:

"the impression of partisan unfairness has certainly been reinforced by the leaks and public comment about Hutchison's case from the District Attorney's office throughout the summer. That the Grand Jury investigation has been conducted with so much fanfare such as the tip-offs to the new media when key records were seized from the former treasurer's office has added a darker tone to the cloudy proceedings." (Hutchison Probe; Fair and Speedy trial is essential, The Dallas Morning News, September 28, 1993)

The Houston Chronicle called into question Earle's impartiality and judgment:
"The fact that Earle refuses to recognize his blunder and would do it again calls into question whether he has the necessary impartiality and judgment to conduct the investigation that to a great extent will determine whether Texas election campaigns will be financed and perhaps determined by corporations or by individuals."

(Self-inflicted wound; District attorney's poor judgment in speaking at a Democratic fund-raiser provides an unintended boost for DeLay's defenders., The Houston Chronicle, May 20, 2005)

But, as Malkin also points out via her link to Ankle Biting Pundits, there will be "Consequences", at least in the short term:

Look folks, there's not good way to try an spin this. Tom DeLay, as expected, has been indicted for campaign finance violations. There's an old saying that "a ham sandwich can be indicted", and by no means is it evidence of guilt. However, in politics, perception is reality, and even if DeLay is cleared eventually the media and the Democrats are going to have a field day. And let's not forget the DA who indicted him is a political hack who pulled a similar stunt on Kay Bailey Hutchinson, which was exposed as a partisan witch hunt. Of course, if DeLay did break the law he should pay the price.

But politically, this is trouble for the GOP. Yes, we've criticized some of his recent actions, but the fact remains he was a big part of the Congressional GOP Leadership - even more than his "Majority Leader" title, and politically he's going to be missed while he concentrates on fighting the charges, as no doubt a conservative agenda will suffer in his absence. Plus, like it or not any GOP candidate who received money from his PAC (and there are many) is going to painted as a crook.

Buckle up people, it's going to be a rough ride for a while, and there's going to be more valleys than peaks in the short term. What this will mean long term is unclear pending the outcome of DeLay's case.

Roundup of Other Opinions: Lorie Byrd at Polipundit notes the Dems are already trying to smear David Drier.

Lifelike Pundits aren't not so certain of DeLay's innocence.

Glenn's initial reaction is that this helps the "Porkbusters" campaign.

NRO's John Podhoretz agrees with us that it's gonna get ugly.