Should DeLay resign

Ticomaya wrote:

Of course he will.

I think, all 'professional' politicians would and will do so.

We had had something similar in the 80's: a minister/secretary of state from the FDP (the liberal party in Germany) was 'connected to the biggest German past-war bribing affair ('Flick Affaire'), stepped back after pressure as minister, got convicted .... stayed in parliament, acted later as an 'elder stateman', became even representative of the government for the payment of the Nazi victims ...

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

You willing to bet a beer on that?

Of course I am. But perhaps we better define the parameters of our wager. I, of course, do not think he will remain in Congress in perpetuity, but certainly will serve out his term, until such time as he might be convicted of a felony. Earle has a history of bringing politically motivated indictments, but a ham sandwich can be indicted. An indictment is no indication of guilt (you know: innocent until proven guilty and all). Remember Earle went after Kay Bailey Hutchinson 12 years ago, much to his embarrasment.

If DeLay is guilty of a crime, and is convicted, then he certainly should resign from Congress.

You think he will resign prior to conviction?

0 Replies

The indictment [PDF text] is available onlne now, via 'findlaw'.

0 Replies

Quote:

Earle has a history of bringing politically motivated indictments, but a ham sandwich can be indicted.

I've seen this phrase, 'a ham sandwich could be indicted,' on many conservative sites I've been to to see what y'all are saying about this.

And you know as well as I do that there has to be at least some evidence before a Grand Jury will hand out a charge.

From what I've read, 11 out of the 15 people in politics charged by Earle in the past have been.... Democrats. So I don't think the partisanship charge is going to hold.

Note that DeLay doesn't ever deny what they are charging him from, he merely attacks those who attack him... classic Republicanism...

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

DeLay will have to resign or will be removed from congresss before his term expires. Clear enough?

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Quote:
Earle has a history of bringing politically motivated indictments, but a ham sandwich can be indicted.

I've seen this phrase, 'a ham sandwich could be indicted,' on many conservative sites I've been to to see what y'all are saying about this.

And you know as well as I do that there has to be at least some evidence before a Grand Jury will hand out a charge.

From what I've read, 11 out of the 15 people in politics charged by Earle in the past have been.... Democrats. So I don't think the partisanship charge is going to hold.

Note that DeLay doesn't ever deny what they are charging him from, he merely attacks those who attack him... classic Republicanism...

Cycloptichorn

"A ham sandwich can be indicted" is an old saying, and is a truism. Yes, there has to be "some" evidence, but we don't know what that evidence is, or whether it is sufficient to support the charge. The Grand Jury only hears from the prosecution, and not the defense.

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

DeLay will have to resign or will be removed from congresss before his term expires. Clear enough?

Yes. You have a bet.

0 Replies

Ticomaya wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:
Quote:
Earle has a history of bringing politically motivated indictments, but a ham sandwich can be indicted.

I've seen this phrase, 'a ham sandwich could be indicted,' on many conservative sites I've been to to see what y'all are saying about this.

And you know as well as I do that there has to be at least some evidence before a Grand Jury will hand out a charge.

From what I've read, 11 out of the 15 people in politics charged by Earle in the past have been.... Democrats. So I don't think the partisanship charge is going to hold.

Note that DeLay doesn't ever deny what they are charging him from, he merely attacks those who attack him... classic Republicanism...

Cycloptichorn

"A ham sandwich can be indicted" is an old saying, and is a truism. Yes, there has to be "some" evidence, but we don't know what that evidence is, or whether it is sufficient to support the charge. The Grand Jury only hears from the prosecution, and not the defense.

well, he's temorarily stepped down. That's a step in the right direction.

0 Replies

The Grand Jury operates on the basis of information that can be supported in many ways - not just one source, although one source may be the trigger for an investigation. Grand Jury reports must be approved by the district attorney and the presiding judge. Most Grand Jury reports are scrutinized thoroughly by the whole Grand Jury. It must pass muster to become a charge against any government department or employee. From my personal experience as a Civil Grand Jury member in Santa Clara County, California, the charges we have made against government employees are now mostly gone from their jobs.

0 Replies

Ticomaya wrote:

"A ham sandwich can be indicted" is an old saying, and is a truism.

Since a truism is an undoubted or self-evident truth, could a grand jury really indict something other than humans (under their jurisdiction)?

0 Replies

It is worth saying that once a person is indicted, his defense attorneys tell him/her to keep his/her mouth shut re any alleged charges and/or presumptions of innocence or guilt. This is to avoid giving the prosecution any extra ammunition to use at trial. (Bill Clinton should have taken that to heart before he wagged his finger in the face of the public and denied an allegation.)

At the same time another lesson Reagan mastered well, Bush 41 never learned, and the Clinton team utilized to the max is that you do not allow charges to go unanswered or for your accusers to get all the publicity. Thus Tom Delay's defenders will be speaking in his defense during the media trial that generally takes place in advamce of the legal one these days. And no, they wisely will not get into any of the specifics.

0 Replies

Yeah, it isn't wise for any of DeLay's defenders to actually address the details of his corruption; they wouldn't have a leg to stand on, politically, if people knew the kind of crap he's been involved with over the last ten years. From bribes, to illegal financing, political arm-twisting, to Diploma mills and illegal trips abroad, DeLay is deep in the corruption of the Republican party.

Just wait until Abramoff starts singing; DeLay will be in big, big trouble.

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/7446492

Quote:

"Those S.O.B.s," Abramoff said last week about DeLay and his staffers, according to his luncheon companion. "DeLay knew everything. He knew all the details."

Abramoff is in serious trouble, and he says DeLay knew everything. Think he'll get flipped? HEheheheheheheh

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Walter writes

Quote:

Since a truism is an undoubted or self-evident truth, could a grand jury really indict something other than humans (under their jurisdiction)?

No, Walter, but a truism is no less a truism when a metaphor is employed to express it.

The Kay Bailey Hutchinson indictment also included 'absolute facts' and 'damning evidence' and 'irrefutable testimony' etc. and she was acquited of all charges and the prosecution looked like idiots.

I don't have a clue whether they have anything at all on Delay. But the acid rhetoric in the media trial is rarely a sure fire indication of what they actually have.

0 Replies

The really important thing to remember is that it does not matter if he is guilty or not, the only issue is if he will over-come the public perception of his being a crook. Nixon was unable to do this whereas Clinton mastered the game. Remember kiddos "everyone does it' so it's of no matter if DeLay does it as well, however, if he's stupid enough to get caught, the entire republican party will share his guilt (because that's the way it works)

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

The Grand Jury operates on the basis of information that can be supported in many ways - not just one source, although one source may be the trigger for an investigation. Grand Jury reports must be approved by the district attorney and the presiding judge. Most Grand Jury reports are scrutinized thoroughly by the whole Grand Jury. It must pass muster to become a charge against any government department or employee. From my personal experience as a Civil Grand Jury member in Santa Clara County, California, the charges we have made against government employees are now mostly gone from their jobs.

When you sat as a grand juror in California, did you ever hear the side of the goverment employees?

0 Replies

Walter Hinteler wrote:

Ticomaya wrote:

"A ham sandwich can be indicted" is an old saying, and is a truism.

Since a truism is an undoubted or self-evident truth, could a grand jury really indict something other than humans (under their jurisdiction)?

It represents a truism Walter. :wink:

0 Replies

Well, I was asking seriously:
under German law, only the procecution indicts. (After they investigated, with the help of the police .... and e.g. a social worker like me [I stayed with the procecution office some weeks on work experience].)
Then the judge(s) decide wether they accept this indictment or not, meaning, if the procecution 'delivered' enough to open a trial.

0 Replies

Under California law, all county and city government employees are required to cooperate with the Grand Jury. We had access to all county and stae government employees - including County Supervisors, Mayors, council members, and department heads and staff. .

0 Replies

The only department we had no access to is the Superior Court - our employer.

0 Replies

Walter Hinteler wrote:

Well, I was asking seriously:
under German law, only the procecution indicts. (After they investigated, with the help of the police .... and e.g. a social worker like me [I stayed with the procecution office some weeks on work experience].)
Then the judge(s) decide wether they accept this indictment or not, meaning, if the procecution 'delivered' enough to open a trial.

I didn't know you were being serious. I'm not familiar with Texas criminal procedure, but in the US a charge alleging a violation of state law is usually either brought by (1) a prosecuting attorney through an complaint, information, or indictment, in which case the defendant is entitled to a preliminary examination before a county magistrate (judge) to determine whether there is probable cause to believe that a crime occurred and the defendant committed that crime, or (2) a grand jury through an indictment, in which case there is no right to an preliminary hearing.

It sounds as if Germanic procedure is similar to #1.

Under the grand jury system, witnesses are called and the prosecuting attorney can attend these sessions and interrogate witnesses. These proceedings are secretive, and the defendant does not have the right to be present or present evidence or argument.

It is unlikely a ham sandwich would actually get indicted. :wink:

0 Replies

Should DeLay resign

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know