![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Oct. 3rd, 2005 05:46 pmDeLay indicted on new money laundering charges
And he still thinks he should be in a leadership position?
He's still claiming that he was never "invited to testify" before the grand jury that indicted him last week; the grand jury foreman, a former police officer and insurance investigator, begs to differ.
Apparently they had invited him to testify, and held off on the indictment until the last possible day to give him the opportunity to appear. (He would have had to testify under oath had he appeared; his lawyers have said publically that he was invited to testify, but they advised him not to appear.) DeLay sent a letter to the DA, who passed it on to the grand jury, but refused to sign anything under oath.
They did not subpoena him, however. Apparently, they felt they had plenty of evidence even without him appearing; the invitation to testify was a chance for him to clear his name.
And of course, it must be a Democratic witch hunt, these indictments, right? Ronnie Earl must be some kind of rabid extremist liberal, right? Well, no. In fact, not at all. In all his years in office, of all 16 of the politicians he's brought charges against (including DeLay), the list of politicians prosecuted breaks down to 12 Democrats and 4 Republicans.
Yes, 3 to 1. Not exactly someone who's going out of his way to go after Republicans.
And he still thinks he should be in a leadership position?
He's still claiming that he was never "invited to testify" before the grand jury that indicted him last week; the grand jury foreman, a former police officer and insurance investigator, begs to differ.
Apparently they had invited him to testify, and held off on the indictment until the last possible day to give him the opportunity to appear. (He would have had to testify under oath had he appeared; his lawyers have said publically that he was invited to testify, but they advised him not to appear.) DeLay sent a letter to the DA, who passed it on to the grand jury, but refused to sign anything under oath.
They did not subpoena him, however. Apparently, they felt they had plenty of evidence even without him appearing; the invitation to testify was a chance for him to clear his name.
And of course, it must be a Democratic witch hunt, these indictments, right? Ronnie Earl must be some kind of rabid extremist liberal, right? Well, no. In fact, not at all. In all his years in office, of all 16 of the politicians he's brought charges against (including DeLay), the list of politicians prosecuted breaks down to 12 Democrats and 4 Republicans.
Yes, 3 to 1. Not exactly someone who's going out of his way to go after Republicans.
