A commenter refers me to Powerline's thoughts on the matter.
"Ronnie Earle, the Democratic District Attorney in Travis County, Texas, is a notorious partisan who has a history of bringing politically-motivated indictments. His most infamous indictment was when he charged Kay Bailey Hutchison, then the Treasurer of Texas, with assault. Earle actually took this trumped-up case to trial, only to be humiliated when he had to dismisss the case during trial.
In September, Earle indicted three aides to Tom DeLay, accusing them of financial improprieties in connection with the Texas legislative elections in 2002. Earle alleges that the aides engaged in "money laundering." What happened is that a number of corporations, including Sears, made contributions to the Republican National Committee. The RNC made contributions to Republican legislative candidates, which corporations are not permitted to do."
They also note that Democrats don't have a similar rule forcing leaders to step down when slapped with felony indictments.
Last things first. That Democrats don't have a similar rule is shameful. It also doesn't absolve Republicans of their responsibility. That's all that needs to be said there. Whatever happened to "taking the high road"?
Now, on to Powerline's substance. First of all, even if Earle is a partisan, its not like Delay has an ethical clean slate. The man is one of the more ethically bankrupt politicians in America. I'm not inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt.
Second, even claims that Earle is just a partisan hack appear to be overstated. Apparently in his time as DA, he has prosecuted more Democratic officeholders than Republicans. At worst he is just a publicity hound, not motivated by a partisan agenda. But the Houston Chronicle--not a particularly liberal paper--has given a positive appraisal of his work, which would belie the claim that he only wants the limelight.
To be honest, the uproar over the rules change isn't really relevant. Maybe DeLay is innocent of these (as yet unlaid) charges, maybe he's guilty as sin. What isn't in dispute is that the man has no ethical compass and no moral scruples. That alone should be enough to knock him out of his post--if the Republican party possessed any political courage.
1 comment:
You said: "Maybe DeLay is innocent of these (as yet unlaid) charges, maybe he's guilty as sin. What isn't in dispute is that the man has no ethical compass and no moral scruples. ..."
So forget whether there's any substance to the charges and accusations, you don't need something as messy as actual evidence to condemn DeLay.
I have a number of issues with your piece, but this one is prima facie proof that you're an idiot.
-- Bud
Post a Comment