DeLay's prosecutors lack a key document

[Demi_Babe]

Oct. 15, 2005, 12:34AM


They don't have list of candidates at the heart of the laundering case, just a 'similar' one
By R.G. RATCLIFFE
Copyright 2005 Houston Chronicle Austin Bureau


AUSTIN - Travis County prosecutors admitted Friday they lack physical proof of a list of Republican candidates that is at the heart of money-laundering indictments against U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay and two of his associates.


The list is key to prosecutors being able to prove that corporate money that could not be legally spent on Texas candidates was specifically exchanged at the national level for donations that legally could be spent on Republican candidates for the Texas House.

Indictments against DeLay, Jim Ellis and John Colyandro state that Ellis gave "a document that contained the names of several candidates for the Texas House" to a Republican National Committee official in 2002 in a scheme to swap $190,000 in restricted corporate money for the same amount of money from individuals that could be legally used by Texas candidates.

But prosecutors said Friday in court that they only had a "similar" list and not the one allegedly received by then-RNC Deputy Director Terry Nelson. Late in the day, they released a list of 17 Republican candidates, but only seven are alleged to have received money in the scheme.

EDITED BY ADMIN: COPYRIGHT


http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/politics/3397339








don't tell me he is going to get off scott free??????

[goclark]

1. Please don't tell me! Kick for answers nt

[Demi_Babe]

2. if he gets off scott free...I will simply

:puke:

[3trievers]

11. I never get too high until the cell door clangs.

These sob's never seem to be answerable to anyone.

[patricia92243]

3. Why on earth did Earle go after Deay if he didn't have the goods. Sounds

like DeLay is a free man. I'm afraid poor Earle's career will be over.

Now if the same sort of thing happens to Rove, Libby etc, the Republicans will be stronger than ever - and nothing will ever happen again - even if they more blately break the law.

[Burning Water]

13. Dang it!!

It's going to be Dan Rather & Mary Mapes all over again. They will totally avoid discussing these charges, and just point out that the evidence is not there. Makes Earle, and us, look like utter fools. I sure hope he's got more, or we're headed for depression city again.

[aquart]

4. The lawyers are spinning like tops, aren't they?

Does this have to be proved on reasonable doubt? Does anyone here have any REASONABLE doubt that DeLay was up to his eyebrows in money laundering? Are we not allowed to convict on circumstantial evidence anymore? Must it ALWAYS be a smoking gun?

Please. Earle has done, what? 15 prosecutions of dirty pols? And now he suddenly doesn't know how to do his business? Please.

[awoke_in_2003]

7. "Are we not allowed to convict ...

on circumstantial evidence anymore?" I don't believe we have ever been able to convict on circumstantial evidence.

[annabanana]

10. People are convicted on circumstantial evidence everyday..

if the results are "beyond a reasonable doubt", or if the "preponderance of evidence" indicates...

there are not eyewitnesses to every murder

[Lasher]

5. Don't panic

DeLay's propaganda machine is in high gear. Essentially what we're seeing here is the old 'they ain't got a thing on me' ploy.

[Why Syzygy]

6. He was indicted by a Grand Jury!

This is not hocus pocus. The goods are there.

Who says he didn't use his daughter's cell phone for his own mess?

Kick Ass, Earle!

[leesa]

8. So why wouldn't he be able to get the list...this sounds like nonsense.

[Vickers]

9. I bet he's got that list.

;)

[windbreeze]

12. Let's not panic, shall we???

Come on now, IF I can go on a particular web site and drag up every political donation I made in the last election....what makes us think that Earle doesn't know who the money from Delay went too???
Aren't there some things that, by law, can't be hidden?(I know, I know, they seem to circumvent the law)
IF a PAC donates to candidates, somewhere those donations have to be accounted for, both by the PAC, and the candidate, for heaven's sake...and if one hid it, that doesn't mean everyone was successful at hiding it...weren't checks written? wire transfers made? or some sort of traceable transaction done?..Even if the donations were made from one to the other in cash...the PAC has to be able to prove where it was spent, if they take it from their account...From what I have read about Earle, and Grand Juries, frivolousness is not something you attribute to either. The goods are there or there wouldn't have been any indictment..
windbreeze

[Humor_In_Cuneiform]

14. Someone had to have told them about the list, so maybe it will

just show up magically :sarcasm: like roverer's missing email???

:shrug: