Perhaps it was the release of the
memos that tightened the noose around Tom DeLay's neck...
I finally have the two checks from Reliant. Will deliver to TD next week probably.
Or maybe when it was revealed that:
Former House majority leader Tom DeLay (R-Tex.) met for at least 30 minutes with the top fundraiser of his Texas political action committee on Oct. 2, 2002, the same day that the Republican National Committee in Washington set in motion a series of financial transactions at the heart of the money-laundering and conspiracy case against DeLay.
Whatever the reason, Tom DeLay's desperation in the face of his multiple-indictments is palpable...he's not only filed a motion accusing Earle of misconduct, he's also said Earle broke the law himself by taking corporate donations. They say you can smell fear...if that's true, I'd say DeLay stinks.
From today's
Washington Post:
Lawyers for former House majority leader Tom DeLay (R-Tex.) asked a Texas court yesterday to quash his indictment on Oct. 3 for money laundering in the 2002 election on the grounds that the charge resulted from misconduct by the Texas prosecutor overseeing the case. [...]
The DeLay legal team's motion yesterday alleged that Earle..."engaged in an extraordinarily irregular, and desperate attempt to contrive a viable charge and get a substitute indictment" -- namely, the allegation of money laundering. [...]
...improperly "attempted to browbeat and coerce" a second grand jury... [...]
that Earle and his staff then "unlawfully incited" the foreman of the first grand jury, John Gibson, to speak openly
One can only assume this (whining) motion was a follow-up to the propaganda piece The Washington Times was kind enough to publish on DeLay's behalf. In it, DeLay:
...said District Attorney Ronnie Earle, who is prosecuting him for trying to involve corporate money in Texas politics, has taken such contributions himself.
"It's real interesting he has this crusade against corporate funds. He took corporate funds, and he's taken union funds, for his own re-election. That's against the law."
Unfortunately for Mr. DeLay (and The Times), the claims have been debunked. From TPM:
But what does seem pretty clear is that Mr. DeLay made an intentionally misleading accusation. And the good folks at the Times just decided to go along for the ride.
As the evidence against DeLay mounts, he's apparently decided that simply screaming "partisan witchhunt" ad nauseum isn't working. But his claims of baseless allegations is falling flat, his motion will be denied, his accusations about donations is a joke...what will he do next? I'm not sure if I should be afraid or if I should break out the popcorn.