1
   

Tom DeLay Arrested! Whoda Thunk?

 
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Oct, 2005 08:25 pm
Power went to DeLay's head, and he thinks he's above the laws of this country. It'll be funny if they show pictures of him getting abused in prison to show him some humble pie.
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Oct, 2005 08:27 pm
And a Republican jury ought to be in order, please.
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Oct, 2005 08:43 pm
Yes I agree there should be a republican judge as well as jury and sole coverage by Fox News, there should be no hint of guilt/innocence. This should be an ordeal by and for republicans and let the nation notice what the repulican party really stands for.
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Oct, 2005 08:57 pm
Then give him a medal and run him for president.
0 Replies
 
Brand X
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Oct, 2005 09:13 pm
Dick DeGuerin, DeLay's main lawyer, is an on-the-record Dem who's supported the party quite consistently (over $15,000 contributed to the Dems vs. about $14,500 to the GOP), including a contribution to the Dem candidate ,Nick Lampson, who's challenging DeLay next November. DeGuerin has stated on the record that he votes in Democratic primaries and is wholly opposed to DeLay's political philosophy and policies. Yet here he is...

Of course this doesn't mean DeLay wants the courts stacked against him...strange as it already is.

And I'm not defending him...but I also haven't already tried him and hung him. Crooked as he may be he has a right to challenge for a fair trial.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Oct, 2005 09:44 pm
I can see it already; DeLay is going to cry foul when he losses the case because of his democrat defense attorney, and he's gonna ask for a retrial.
0 Replies
 
Brand X
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Oct, 2005 09:58 pm
cicerone imposter wrote:
I can see it already; DeLay is going to cry foul when he losses the case because of his democrat defense attorney, and he's gonna ask for a retrial.


LOL!
0 Replies
 
kelticwizard
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Oct, 2005 10:08 pm
Brand X wrote:
Dick DeGuerin, DeLay's main lawyer, is an on-the-record Dem who's supported the party quite consistently (over $15,000 contributed to the Dems vs. about $14,500 to the GOP)....
That's very, very close to a 50/50 split. DeGuerin clearly doesn't favor one party over the other.



Brand X wrote:
... DeGuerin has stated on the record that he votes in Democratic primaries and is wholly opposed to DeLay's political philosophy and policies. Yet here he is...
He's here because DeLay hired him.

Brand X wrote:
Of course this doesn't mean DeLay wants the courts stacked against him...strange as it already is.
I'm sorry, but you cannot take the fact that DeLay's own lawyer might belong to the other political party as evidence of the court being "stacked against" DeLay. DeLay hired this guy, that is why he is here.


Brand X wrote:
And I'm not defending him [DeLay]...but I also haven't already tried him and hung him. Crooked as he may be he has a right to challenge for a fair trial.
There was probably close to a 50-50 chance that DeLay would get a Republican for a judge. The fact that he pulled a Democrat is indicative of nothing other than the fact that we do not allow defendants to choose the political affiliations of the judges at their trials.

You're really grasping at air here, Brand X.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Oct, 2005 10:38 pm
Isn't it more relevant if his attorney is a christian?
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Oct, 2005 10:38 pm
Isn't it more relevant if his attorney is a christian?
0 Replies
 
Brand X
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Oct, 2005 10:44 pm
kelticwizard wrote:
Brand X wrote:
Dick DeGuerin, DeLay's main lawyer, is an on-the-record Dem who's supported the party quite consistently (over $15,000 contributed to the Dems vs. about $14,500 to the GOP)....
That's very, very close to a 50/50 split. DeGuerin clearly doesn't favor one party over the other.



Brand X wrote:
... DeGuerin has stated on the record that he votes in Democratic primaries and is wholly opposed to DeLay's political philosophy and policies. Yet here he is...
He's here because DeLay hired him.

Brand X wrote:
Of course this doesn't mean DeLay wants the courts stacked against him...strange as it already is.
I'm sorry, but you cannot take the fact that DeLay's own lawyer might belong to the other political party as evidence of the court being "stacked against" DeLay. DeLay hired this guy, that is why he is here.


Brand X wrote:
And I'm not defending him [DeLay]...but I also haven't already tried him and hung him. Crooked as he may be he has a right to challenge for a fair trial.
There was probably close to a 50-50 chance that DeLay would get a Republican for a judge. The fact that he pulled a Democrat is indicative of nothing other than the fact that we do not allow defendants to choose the political affiliations of the judges at their trials.

You're really grasping at air here, Brand X.


Not grasping for anything, just pointing out some more aspects of the circus.
0 Replies
 
kelticwizard
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Oct, 2005 10:48 pm
Brand X wrote:

Not grasping for anything, just pointing out some more aspects of the circus.

Okay, I'll accept that.
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Oct, 2005 04:09 am
Does this mean an alleged thief or murderer can demand a thief or murderer as their judge, since anyone else would be prejudiced against them?
0 Replies
 
djjd62
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Oct, 2005 06:23 am
dlowan wrote:
Does this mean an alleged thief or murderer can demand a thief or murderer as their judge, since anyone else would be prejudiced against them?


it's lke trying ti find a jury of your peers, really a ridiculous concept
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Oct, 2005 07:09 am
Brand X
DeLay chose that lawyer despite his democratic affiliation because he knows that he is the best lawyer money can buy. Hell as most lawyers do he will defend his client to the best of his ability even if he knows his client is guilty.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Oct, 2005 08:06 am
dlowan wrote:
Does this mean an alleged thief or murderer can demand a thief or murderer as their judge, since anyone else would be prejudiced against them?


I didn't ask such question: I take it for granted.

(Here, in Germany, you get YOUR judge, if you like it or not, especially, if you like him/her or not.)

Article 101 Basic Law [Constitution] of Germany

Quote:
[...] No one may be removed from the jurisdiction of his lawful judge.
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Oct, 2005 09:03 am
Indeed. That is why I was shocked.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Oct, 2005 09:32 am
Political contributions are hardly a reason to remove a judge. Unless they can show the judge can't be impartial he won't be removed. The bar is set high for a reason. Delay won't win on the judge and he won't win on his filings to have the case dismissed because of Earle. Simply claiming it is political is a far cry from being able to show it to the court. The burden of proof is on Delay for these claims. Records of who you spoke to and who you contributed to don't show a legal bias. You have to be a heck of a lot more specific than that.
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Oct, 2005 09:35 am
DeLay has hired the best attorney money can buy. Party affiliation has little to do with how that man performs before the court. If I were a polititian in Delay's shoes, I would want the same representation.
0 Replies
 
kelticwizard
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Oct, 2005 10:05 am
I accept Brand X's explanation of why he mentioned DeGuerin had contributed to the Democratic party. Because of DeLay's position, this trial is surely going to turn into a circus of sorts, Brand X was just setting up the characters.

Incidentally, DeGuerin's admission that he voted in Democratic primaries is not particularly indicative of Democratic leanings. That's because Texas has essentially open primaries-any registered voter can vote in any party's primary as long as he has not voted in any other party's primary. Inother words, one registered voter, one primary vote-but the primary vote can only be in one party per election.

So it is quite likely that DeGuerin voted in Republican primaries as well, if his 50/50 split in contributions to the two parties is any indication. Which it likely is.

It is in DeLay's interest, however, for DeGuerin to portray himself as a Democrat as much as possible. Since most Democrats don't like DeLay, and DeGuerin is not going to be able to keep Democrats off the jury, DeGurerin is trying to tell the potential jury pool out there that DeLay is innocent, and that even a Democrat such as himself is willing to fight the injustice of Earle's charges against DeLay.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/02/2024 at 01:54:47