|
Around three o'clock
yesterday afternoon I learned of the indictment of Tom Delay. By seven
that evening not only had the mainstream media convicted him I leaned that
Mr. Delay is also a money laundered and that the republican party is rife
with corruption.HmmThat's swift justice for you. Lucky for you dear viewer
here at the frog we research before we put pen to paper. A simple search
on the net quickly provides us with the very court documents in question.
So I read. Finished with the first page and Delay's name has not been
mentioned but it's early yet. Page two. Nope, still not mentioned although
his two other co defendants have been. Oh here we go. At the bottom of the
third page and...nothing. He committed an offense apparently, but the
document fails to say what exactly that offense is. No I always though
that in this country a person charged with an offense has the right to be
told of what exactly he is accused of. That is the only way a person
defend themselves. So what do we have? Tom Delay has been indicted on a
conspiracy charge or as the indictment says "entered into an agreement" .
What the hell does that mean? And where did the conspiracy take place?
This isn't surprising to me being that just two weeks ago This district
Attorney proclaimed that Delay was not the focus of the investigation. It
was his two defendants. John Colyandro, and James Ellis that the was
after. Sounds odd. And then there is Ronnie Earl who it seems embodies the
term conspiracy. Of the eight corporations listed in the indictment, Earl
offered to drop the charges (Making Illegal contributions) to four of them
if they agreed to make large financial contributions to a program designed
to publicize Earle's belief that corporate involvement in politics is
harmful to American democracy. Doesn't this remind you of the Reverend
Jackson and his Rainbow/Exstotion fund? Unless I'm way off the mark this
sounds like Earl has "entered into an agreement" to except bribes. For
example Sears was to make a significant contribution to an organization
known as the Center for Deliberative Democracy at Stanford University. The
Center is devoted to something called "deliberative polling," which was
developed by a Stanford professor (and Earle acquaintance) named James S.
Fishkin. You scratch my back and I'll scratch yours. But it gets better.
Earl a Democrat, spoke earlier this year at a Democratic function and
boasted about his pursuit of Delay. Now I'm not a lawyer nor do I play one
on television but I'm pretty sure a District Attorney cannot comment on
pending cases,let alone bragging and promising to bring down a certain
person. He tried this twelve years ago with Kay Bailey Hutchinson and was
laughed out of court and I'm sure he'll be laughed at again. But he has
given the Dems renewed vigor to use the popular phrase "culture of
corruption". If anything this gives Chris Matthew's and Keith Olberman
some new material to distort.
-Bert |