Just Desserts

[mattp]

I think Foraker may be right that Earle started out focusing on Jack Abramoff and TRIMPAC. Does that make this a witch hunt? As I noted already, I seem to remember reading that Earle similarly hounded the Democrats when they were in power.

[mattp]

Fairweather asserts that Earle tried six times to get a grand jury to indict DeLay. He HAS been active for a couple of years, and I think he has a DeLay crony or two, but I only recall there being one "no indictment" result. Were there three more that nobody but Fairweather seems to be talking about?

 

Fairweather also purports to have some legal expertise in the "ex post facto" application of the law. He is right, that has been stated as a defense for DeLay, but as far as I know, that defense has not yet been successful. I think it remains to be seen whether conspiracy applied to election financing prior to the new law where it may have been "added" or simply "clarified."

[mattp]

Peter,

 

Why are you so hung up on attacking Earle? Again I ask: is it because you cannot readily defend DeLay, who has been admonished for all kinds of ethics violations in addition to this current business, has been sued and settled on a charge of perjury, etc.?

 

Also, I say "bullshit" again. I will repeat myself here, lest you keep trotting out this example of how I am dodging your questions: I don't know whether Earle did wrong in allowing the movie makers to follow him around or not. That is exactly what I said already in that other thread:

 

I have no idea if Earle is a slimball or not, or whether any of what you list is true, or what the significance of it may be.

 

As I said, I don't know what "extraordinary access" they had. Did they film the grand jury in deliberation, or something else that is supposed to be secret? I don't know if any of the filming was a violation of ANY standard or conduct or criminal code. As far as I can tell, it is only right-wing bloggers and the odd supporter of DeLay who are thus far complaining about it and, I would note, the film makers tried to get DeLay to participate in their project and he refused. If he thinks the result is one-sided, he only has himself to blame.

 

It is not unreasonable to question a prosecutor's tactics. Your questions, here, appear consistent with the standard GOP current strategy of avoiding the issues raised and attacking the critic.

[Camilo]

Caption?

[Cobra_Commander]

"that hurricane better make landfall quick!"

[archenemy]

How much does he rent out that gap between his teeth for?

[foraker]

the tooth gap is functional in all bottom-feeders.

[Peter_Puget]

 

There is much about Earle's behavior that is terrible. Behavior doesn't have to be illegal to make it wrong. Certainly a prosecutor giving speeches at fundraisers explicitly attacking the as yet not indicted subject of an investigation is something that any reasonable person would consider inappropriate. This behavior is not even disputed by Earle. Earle’s behavior might or might not belong to the class of illegal actions but it is certainly unprofessional and can only lead to bolstering the belief that the law is simply a tool to be used to screw your enemies.

 

We certainly expect our politicians to act like partisan jerks, is it wrong to hope that a DA would hold himself to a higher standard? One that would seek to avoid even the mere appearance of a conflict of interest. I think not.

[Dru]

the tooth gap is functional in all bottom-feeders.

 

Tell it to Letterman.

[mattp]

Peter, we could say the same about DeLay:

 

There is much about Delay's behavior that is terrible. Behavior doesn't have to be illegal to make it wrong. Certainly a politician's hiding their campaingn contributors is something that any reasonsable person would consider inappropriate. This behavior is not even disputed by Delay. Delay's behavior might or might not belong to the class of illegal actions but it is certainly unprofessional and can only lead to bolstering the belief that the campaign finance laws are simply an ineffective tool.

 

We certainly expect our politicians to act like partisan jerks, is it wrong to hope that a politician who has repeated said he was going to "clean up Washington" would hold himself to a higher standard? One that would seek to avoid even the mere appearance of a corruption? I think not.

 

Again, your point may well be valid: tell me more about these speeches at the fundraisers where Earle viciously attacked DeLay and how they might have been expected to unfairly influence the outcome of the grand jury. That would be wrong. But if all he did was speak about how tough he is and how he's going after bad guys, he's speaking as a candidate just as our own King County prosecutor or anybody else in that kind of role talks about how they're tough on crime.

 

Again - you continue to attack the prosecutor. Can you NOT defend the prosecuted?

[ScottP]

Caption?

Six out of ten...wait, I looked up 'micrognathia', he's got 7 out of 10.

I'm going with FAS and that's my final answer.

[cj001f]

We certainly expect our politicians to act like partisan jerks, is it wrong to hope that a DA would hold himself to a higher standard? One that would seek to avoid even the mere appearance of a conflict of interest. I think not.

 

No, but then I expect judges to act even more independant, not like partisan jerks (cough, Scalia, cough)

[mattp]

The Democrats prosecuted by Earle and his Public Integrity Unit include former Texas House Speaker Gib Lewis, former Texas Attorney General Jim Mattox, former State Treasurer Warren Harding and former Texas Supreme Court Justice Don Yarbrough.

 

MSNBC

[knotzen]

How come someone changed the title of this thread? I keep clicking on it, thinking it's going to be about cakes, and pies, and donuts and shit, and it's about...just shit (aka that damn hypocritical Republican DeLay).

 

Man, I hate when that happens.