Maybe he should ask Raymond J. Donovan.
Until then, all he has is publicity about the overturning of his politically-driven conviction, Tom DeLay money laundering verdict overturned:
A Texas Court of Appeals in Austin has overturned the conviction of former U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, attorney Brian Wice told KVUE sister station KHOU 11 News.
DeLay, 66, was convicted in 2010 for his alleged role in a scheme to influence Texas elections.
He was found guilty of money laundering and conspiracy to commit money laundering after he was accused of helping funnel corporate money to Texas candidates in 2002.
In documents released early Thursday, however, an appeals court said the evidence in the case was “legally insufficient to sustain DeLay’s convictions.”
The court said all judgments against DeLay were reversed, and the former congressman was formally acquitted.
For both DeLay and his critics, the process was frustratingly slow, due in part to some of the appeals court justices in Austin recusing themselves as well as DeLay’s successful effort to have a judge on the panel removed because of anti-Republican comments she made.
DeLay was sentenced to three years in prison, but he stayed free while his case made its way through the appellate process.
Read the court’s decision to overturn DeLay conviction (PDF)
I don’t have time today to review the decisions. I thought I had written about this case before, but I can’t seem to find it.
All you need to know about this is that it was a political prosecution which attempted to criminalize politics.
Perhaps readers can add more details in the comments.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Tom Delay destroyed his own reputation. The democrats merely took advantage of it.
DeLay is an Establicon bastard, no doubt. But this was a ridiculous prosecution, based on actions that simply were not illegal. This goes to prove that you can, in fact, smear a dirtbag.
Agreed. The prosecutroiral misconduct in this case was pretty staggering. On par with the Florida special prosecution of George Zimmerman.
prosecutorial*
The process is the punishment.
…it was a political prosecution which attempted to criminalize politics.
The same thing Rush said on his show, today. A case of great minds thinking alike, I guess.
Rush has been saying the same thing all along.
“Justice delayed is justice denied,” even if you are a SOB named Delay. Had be been a Liberal SOB, none of this would have happened.
The real money laundering took place through Solyndra:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/09/19/obama-donor-gained-nearly-1-billion-in-tax-credits-in-solyndra-bankruptcy/
Maybe Lady Justice can use the Amazon link on this site and buy a new blindfold. Seems her old one has become worn and has too many holes (yes, Henry… I saw the potential when I used the word “holes” but today is my semi-annual day to show some class).
And I fully support your occasional nod to classiness.
The Ray Donovan case was much worse. The jury acquitted him immediately, and said that the case should never have been brought to trial. The Donovan case was tried in the Bronx, but Donovan’s company is in New Jersey, and the project was in (I think) Manhattan. One of the subcontractors was in the Bronx. Evidently the prosecutor thought a Bronx jury would be more inclined to convict. To understand why read Tom Wolfe’s “Bonfire of the Vanities.”
I lived in New York city (including some years in the Bronx) for over 30 years, and this place is one of the most corrupt cities the nation. The judiciary is thoroughly corrupt as special prosecutor Maurice Nadjari showed us. It was well known among New York lawyers that at one time that you got to be a judge by making a big contribution to the Democratic Party in NYC. In fact one appointee died before getting on the bench and his wife sued to get the money back– and won! This must have been a difficult one for the trial judge. How could he deny the charge when he got his judgeship the same way?
New York is a cesspool of liberalism, crime and corruption. I am so glad to be out of there.
I live in Houston, just north of Delay’s district. He is a self made small businessman who got into politics. (He owned an extermination company.) The district attorney that prosecuted him and some of his staff were in Travis County, Austin Texas. About 165 miles northwest of Houston.
The whole trial was based on a law that was passed 2 years after Delay’s moving the money around. Previously, it had been done by both parties.
There was no doubt in anyone’s mind that when a jury in Travis County, (Keep Austin Weird, is the town motto), got a chance to indict/convict a Republican Speaker of the House, who uses insecticides and lives in Houston; they would. I believe he asked for a change of venue, but not surprisingly it was denied. Some of his staff plead guilty for reduced sentences, I believe.
I began looking at the Republicans with a lot more disgust after that.
Why would you look at Republicans with disgust?
In 2005, when Delay was indicted, the Republicans controlled the White House and House of Representatives. The Senate was 51-49 Democrat (2 independents caucusing Democrat).
A political party with that much power which allows a key player to be taken down by a local DA using trumped up charges is contemptuously ineffective. Indeed Republicans have been treated with contempt ever since.
Am I to understand your position is that Republicans should have blocked the state prosecution of DeLay? How, exactly?
Sounds like an invitation to political corruption to me. Far better the process play out – but there must be consequences for misconduct at the level of Ronnie Earle. Prosecutors who deliberately and serially abuse their discretion should die in prison.
Sadly, the game is not played with Marquis of Queensbury rules. It is blood sport. There were any number of Democrats who were legitimately chargeable on the Federal level.
The Bush Administration even allowed Ted Stevens to be corruptly charged on the Federal Level.
So, at one time campaign funding was subject to scrutiny. Did this change with Obama or earlier?
Tom Delay can now be Speaker of the United States House of Representatives. The Constitution does not specify that the Speaker must be a member of the House.
Perhaps its time to say bye-bye Boehner.
Invalid legal challenges are how the Dems pushed Sarah Palin out of the governorship isn’t it?
Yes.
It was mainly one Democrat, using an ill-considered ethics law which was passed at Palin’s urging. He certainly abused the intent of the law, but it is the fault of those who drafted and passed it and failed to amend or repeal it.
Earle is different. He knew or should have known his persecution was politically motivated and not justified by the facts, but he did it anyway. We have to give prosecutors that discretion, there is simply no other way the justice system can function.
But Alaska essentially gave prosecutorial discretion to every citizen with no protections for the unjustly accused. Even after being cleared on charge after charge, Palin was on the hook for all her legal fees, and her time was required to defend each one, meaning she couldn’t do her job.
It’s a strange thing. Every state has passed numerous ethics laws, yet they are used as often to harass the innocent as to find the guilty. And our ethics, believe it or not, appear not to have improved a bit!
If Delay is a dirt bag, what is Nancy Pelosi? Liberals hate effective Republican politicians.
I’ll have to read up on the original case. The way I remember it is that Delay took a large contribution in one organization and transferred it to another, skirting campaign financing and/or reporting regulations. So what he did looked illegal to the typical outsider. I also recall that the arguments in his defense were somewhat technical, with a helping of “everybody has done this sort of thing”. I’m glad he got his reversal, because I do believe it was a political prosecution, but he didn’t exactly seem spotless to me.
If what he did was “technically” legal, why is he not “spotless,” then?
Or must we all not only obey the law, but your code as well? Did I miss the election where you won that high office?
I’d love to hear you define the difference between technically legal and legal.
Dancing With The Stars?
If DeLay runs for a House seat, again, even if he’s elected, he’d start at the bottom of the totem pole.
Just finished reading “This Town” by Mark Leibovich. No sane person would ever look forward to going back to DC. It’s not fit to live in. And, the “party circuit” mentality has run itself off the tracks!
I don’t know if DeLay “does” the “speaking circuit.” But he’d make about $40,000 a pop. Plus, his expenses get paid.
Heck, Mark O’Mara just gave up his law practice for a steady job on CNN, where he hopes to be a “Nancy Grace” type legal analyst. (That’s where the money is.) So we’ll get to see if his new career choice blossoms, or not.
DeLay could do a “tell all” by relaying how you take a “Hammer to DC.”
An example of a felony that prevents firearm ownership in spite of firearms being irrelevant.
Tom DeLay was my guy here in TX. I really believe he was set up. Ronnie Earle, as we all know down here, is nothing but scum.
If DeLay had been a back-bench congressman, or if he had not been an extraordinarily effective leader and organizer for Republican campaigns, he would never have been targeted.
In earlier times, some judge or Texas Democratic Party official would have set Earle down and told him to cut the crap or he would be out of a job. But we’ve long since passed the point where Democrats care about justice or honor or truth or decency. It’s only power now. Uncle Joe Stalin would be proud of them all.
The reason that the Dems went after DeLay so viciously, is because he hurt them where it hurts the most – in the pocket book. When the Reps took over the House, for the first time in 40 years, and held it for the first time in 75 years, DeLay was able to implement a rule that limited access to Republicans in the House if the party trying for access had given more to Dems than Reps. And, this was most everyone at the time. This meant that if you wanted to lobby the controlling Republicans in the House, you needed to pull a lot of your traditional Dem funding and give it to the Reps instead. As a result, he was probably the most reviled Congressman by many Democrats across the country.
Ted Stevens was merely a target of opportunity. The Dems were able to pick up his Senate seat by prosecuting him, even if he had done nothing wrong, but just looked dirty. Doubt that they will be able to hold it the next time around though, given the demographics, and how they won it last time. Of course, it was dirty politics, but what do you expect?
Hence, my post were I said I was disgusted with the Republican party. Once a Democratic activist prosecutor in one of the most liberal areas of the country targeted a Republican leader, the rest of the party should have supported him. That they didn’t is a disgrace.