home

DeLay Exits: Why Now?

By Jeralyn, Section Other Politics
Posted on Tue Apr 04, 2006 at 07:23:21 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Christy at Firedoglake thinks maybe the family squeeze got to DeLay. That's a distinct possibility. Rudy pleaded guilty and one of the concessions was his wife wouldn't be charged. I reported here on the closing of the Alexander Strategy Group and Buckham and on Isikoff's Newsweek piece about it:

The Washington Post has reported that in 2000, Abramoff and Buckham used their credit cards to pay for a trip to the United Kingdom for DeLay and his wife. Investigators are looking into Buckham's connection to DeLay's wife, Christine. She was paid $115,000 over three years by Alexander Strategy Group, a lobbying firm run by Buckham and Rudy, to identify the favorite charities of members of Congress.

TChris has more here.

The Washington Post points out that by resigning now, DeLay can use his campaign funds for legal fees.

DeLay also is entitled under federal election rules to convert any or all of the remaining funds from his reelection campaign to his legal expenses, whether or not he resigns, is indicted or loses the election. Election lawyers say one advantage of bowing out of the election now is that the campaign cash can be converted to pay legal bills immediately, instead of being drained in the course of a bid to stay in office.

< Another Tuesday Open Thread | The Real Cover-Up in the Valerie Plame Investigation >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    DeLay Exits: Why Now? | 33 comments (33 topical)
    Re: DeLay Exits: Why Now? (none / 0) (#1)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 04, 2006 at 08:11:38 AM EST
    He wants the money for legal fees and he figured he was gonna lose. It certainly wasn't for anything magnanimous or noble. The guy's swine, but he does possess a certain degree of animal cunning.

    Re: DeLay Exits: Why Now? (none / 0) (#2)
    by Che's Lounge on Tue Apr 04, 2006 at 08:13:41 AM EST
    Another cockroach exterminated. Is there still hope for DEMoCRACY ? Anyone else feeling like the guys at the end of the parade with the shovels? Cleaning up the S**T left behind by these slobs and the horses they rode in on.

    Re: DeLay Exits: Why Now? (none / 0) (#3)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 04, 2006 at 08:19:52 AM EST
    Elephants do tend to do that, don't they?

    Re: DeLay Exits: Why Now? (none / 0) (#4)
    by Steven Sanderson on Tue Apr 04, 2006 at 08:49:29 AM EST
    Perhaps DeLay sees of a slew of federal indictments heading for him and he's preparing for the future by moving to Alexandria, VA hoping that he'll be assigned to a cozier federal pen after he makes his plea bargain.

    Re: DeLay Exits: Why Now? (none / 0) (#5)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 04, 2006 at 08:55:34 AM EST
    Good.

    Re: DeLay Exits: Why Now? (none / 0) (#6)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 04, 2006 at 08:59:05 AM EST
    That is normal in this so called country, we may as well admit it now, its called the paid off for the deal made against you. she needs prison with the others, but ask how much money did bush get in this paid off?

    Re: DeLay Exits: Why Now? (none / 0) (#7)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 04, 2006 at 09:29:32 AM EST
    Why now? Because more indictments are on the way as a result of the arrests of all of his former senior staff members and he knows he's in serious trouble. At least that's what I'm hoping...

    Re: DeLay Exits: Why Now? (none / 0) (#8)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 04, 2006 at 09:31:07 AM EST
    Don't count Delay out yet. If he survives the state investigation and the Federal investigation doesn't connect him expect him to run in another district or chair a comittee for the GoP.

    Re: DeLay Exits: Why Now? (none / 0) (#9)
    by Pete Guither on Tue Apr 04, 2006 at 09:32:56 AM EST
    Let me get this straight. His legal troubles have to do with campaign finance, and he can use his campaign funds to finance his legal defense? Well, isn't that sweet. If he had been a slightly more upstanding citizen -- say, a drug dealer -- the government would have seized his money and anything else they could get their hands on, under asset forfeiture.

    Re: DeLay Exits: Why Now? (none / 0) (#10)
    by caramel on Tue Apr 04, 2006 at 09:54:45 AM EST
    Too many dead cats in the bag that he knows he can no longer hide from the public's eyes. He is the nĀ°1 crook in the Texan gang, so this is great news. Still I wonder how he's going to fall back on his feet, because he will continue to do well with his numerous political covers around the country, maybe in a more discreet way?

    Re: DeLay Exits: Why Now? (none / 0) (#11)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 04, 2006 at 10:09:07 AM EST
    Yeah, that must be why he resigned. Keep tellin' yourself that, sport. Nobody else is buyin' it.

    Re: DeLay Exits: Why Now? (none / 0) (#12)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 04, 2006 at 10:23:08 AM EST
    And such a fine, fine christian... to boot.

    Re: DeLay Exits: Why Now? (none / 0) (#13)
    by Deb on Tue Apr 04, 2006 at 11:42:35 AM EST
    I think he made this decision before the primary and waited to announce it so that he could max out the campaign donations that he can now use for his legal defense. He had so little interest in the primary that he spent election night with lobbyists in DC at a fundraiser. Now he will become a teevee evangelist and fleece the faithful and still keep up the lifestyle he has become accustomed to.

    Re: DeLay Exits: Why Now? (none / 0) (#14)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 04, 2006 at 12:36:23 PM EST
    If I was DOJ (a REAL DOJ, not this sycophantic, sadistic or petrified, shell of DOJ) I'd be wondering why a large portion of the Bugman's campaign contributions (soon to be used for legal fees) weren't the proceeds of a criminal enterprise subject to forfeiture. Hmmmmn?

    Re: DeLay Exits: Why Now? (none / 0) (#15)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 04, 2006 at 04:28:21 PM EST
    Che's Lounge DEMoCRACY Sadly, you fail to realize the United States is a Republic.

    Re: DeLay Exits: Why Now? (none / 0) (#16)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 04, 2006 at 04:36:36 PM EST
    And China is a Peoples' Republic. What's your point? They don't like dissent any more than you wingnuts. You've got a lot in common.

    Re: DeLay Exits: Why Now? (none / 0) (#17)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 04, 2006 at 05:02:06 PM EST
    charliedontsurf1 1. China is called the People Republic, nice. 2. My point was simple, if you really did not grasp it, then I can explain more fully. 3. I'm a wingnut? Strange.

    Re: DeLay Exits: Why Now? (none / 0) (#18)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 04, 2006 at 05:19:17 PM EST
    Posted by Muddy April 4, 2006 06:02 PM charliedontsurf1
    1. China is called the People Republic, nice. 2. My point was simple, if you really did not grasp it, then I can explain more fully. 3. I'm a wingnut? Strange.
    No, it's called the peoples' republic. I'll have to take your word for it as to how nice it is or isn't. Perhaps I should be the one to explain it all to you. Is you is or is you ain't. It's all too common that wingnuts love to crow about the fact that the US ain't no Democracy. They seem to take comfort in that fact. Now that's strange.

    Re: DeLay Exits: Why Now? (none / 0) (#19)
    by scarshapedstar on Tue Apr 04, 2006 at 06:45:52 PM EST
    The Washington Post points out that by resigning now, DeLay can use his campaign funds for legal fees.
    Hahaha... in your face, all you fundies who, um, funded his campaign.

    Re: DeLay Exits: Why Now? (none / 0) (#20)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 04, 2006 at 08:06:52 PM EST
    charliedontsurf1 First, why do you insist in calling names? Does it make you feel powerful or something? Second, I'm a bit confused as to your objection at correcting ignorance on our type of government, how that is a bad thing? Third, you seem very angry. (although I could be wrong here, if so I apologize)

    Re: DeLay Exits: Why Now? (none / 0) (#21)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 04, 2006 at 08:25:27 PM EST
    Muddy, I'm with you. Charlie, please don't call other commenters names like wingnuts. That's for other sites. You know better.

    Re: DeLay Exits: Why Now? (none / 0) (#22)
    by Che's Lounge on Tue Apr 04, 2006 at 10:26:07 PM EST
    Yeah charlie and stop saying I'm ignorant. Oh right, that wasn't you. Muddy, It's a matter of semantics. Do you have a point or, instead of directly calling them as you see them like Charlie does, you make tangential insults that are barly germaine to the topic of the thread. Memo to host: While you were worrying about Charlie's language, Muddy hijacked your thread.

    Re: DeLay Exits: Why Now? (none / 0) (#23)
    by Che's Lounge on Tue Apr 04, 2006 at 10:31:02 PM EST
    And as long as George Bush is "president", this is no true republic. It's a dictatorship.

    Re: DeLay Exits: Why Now? (none / 0) (#24)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Apr 05, 2006 at 05:57:11 AM EST
    Hey, as far as I'm concerned, the presumption of innocence only applies to a Court of Law. Delay's a public figure who's lived by the sword. He's never had any qualms about denyin' anybody and everybody quarter whether they've asked for it or not. Let me put it this way, he wouldn't if I was on fire and I second the emotion so we understand each other perfectly.

    Re: DeLay Exits: Why Now? (none / 0) (#25)
    by squeaky on Wed Apr 05, 2006 at 10:21:13 AM EST
    Delay's recent slip of the tongue may prove the answer as to "why now?".
    As we pointed out, it would be Buckham's guilty plea that would be real trouble for DeLay. Maybe that's why he bowed out Monday.
    link

    Re: DeLay Exits: Why Now? (none / 0) (#26)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Apr 05, 2006 at 05:33:23 PM EST
    charlie - Ever seen "Twelve Angry Men?" Rent it, or better yet, buy it on Ebay. You could learn a lot from it.

    Re: DeLay Exits: Why Now? (none / 0) (#27)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Apr 05, 2006 at 06:44:40 PM EST
    I've seen it many times, Jim. Just which part of the distinction between a Court of Law and the Court of Public Opinion is eluding you?

    Re: DeLay Exits: Why Now? (none / 0) (#28)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Apr 05, 2006 at 09:12:44 PM EST
    charlie - Your response tells me you have either NOT seen it, or failed completely to understand the point. But no surprise there.

    Re: DeLay Exits: Why Now? (none / 0) (#29)
    by jondee on Wed Apr 05, 2006 at 09:48:30 PM EST
    Youve just gotta use your imagination. Imagine that poor, mixed up kid in Twelve Angry Men plus the best lawyers money can buy, "friends" all up and down K-street, probobly a sizeable nest egg socked away in some offshore bank somewhere, every big pastor on the red state faith based circuit on his side and youve got Delay - all he needs is the switch blade.

    Re: DeLay Exits: Why Now? (none / 0) (#30)
    by jondee on Wed Apr 05, 2006 at 10:24:07 PM EST
    Charlie - Maybe you should stick to commenting on Cynthia McKinney - on any thread - that seems to be safe ground.

    Re: DeLay Exits: Why Now? (none / 0) (#31)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Apr 06, 2006 at 12:35:23 AM EST
    I've seen it many times, Jim charlie - Your response tells me you have either NOT seen it, or failed completely to understand the point. Perhaps you could make your point a little less 'nuanced' PPJ, you seem to be more confortable when you give reign to your Red State tendencies. Why are you trying to censor charlie, PPJ? Don't you believe in freedom of speech? :>)

    Re: DeLay Exits: Why Now? (none / 0) (#32)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Apr 09, 2006 at 05:19:13 AM EST
    Pete, You say.... "Let me get this straight. His legal troubles have to do with campaign finance, and he can use his campaign funds to finance his legal defense? Well, isn't that sweet. If he had been a slightly more upstanding citizen -- say, a drug dealer -- the government would have seized his money and anything else they could get their hands on, under asset forfeiture." Well, I hate to break the bad news to you but CLINTON and GORE received money illegally and there are statements regarding Clinton's Drug use and Dealing drugs in the Whitehouse. His campaign money use... "For the first time in the history of the presidency, President Clinton sets up a legal defense fund to solicit funds to cover his legal fees related to the Whitewater investigation and sexual harassment lawsuit. President Bill Clinton sold private White House dinners to donors who gave at least $100,000 to the Democratic National Committee - plus ``private impromptu meetings'' with senior officials, a ``personal DNC staff contact'' to cut through federal red tape, and seats on foreign trade missions. Bill Clinton, Al Gore and the Democrat Party broke current campaign finance laws and degraded the White House by using access to the president and the office of the presidency as a fund-raising device for a political campaign. Not only did Clinton himself initiate the selling of overnight stays at the White House, he approved rewards for top donors including meals, golf outings and morning jogs." Quote from Mr. Internet inventor himself..."I did nothing wrong. I did nothing illegal. I will not do it again." - Al Gore, 1997 I think that qualifies for illegal use of funds, don't you? His Drug Use... "Jack Christy of the USA Radio Network has been tracking a story about Grand Jury investigation into drug use in the Oval Office and how Monica Lewinsky carried drugs into the White House for Clinton. Click Here to listen to the interview with Jack Christy on the George Putnum show, "Talk Balk." Was complicit in the shipment of drugs through Arkansas. Allowed laundering of drug money through ADFA (Arkansas Development and Finance Authority). Clinton has been tied to the $100 million per-month drug running operation of the "Mena Cartel". Clinton's best friend, Dan Lasater, is the only one involved who went to jail along with Clinton's brother, Roger. After staying in jail only a few short months he was granted a full and complete pardon by Bill Clinton the day after he got out." I wonder why he pardoned his Brother? For more drugs? probably!! So, Tom Delay has not been proven guilty of any wrong doing like our Former IMPEACHED lying of a PRESIDENT such as Clinton.... If Tom is found Guilty of any wrong doing, then i'll eat my words but for now, we have to wait and see, just like with Clinton ADMITTING to having sex with Monica after he'd pointed his finger in that camera to us Americans and was eventually caught in his lies!! Mrs Marcellus

    Re: DeLay Exits: Why Now? (none / 0) (#33)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Apr 09, 2006 at 08:05:54 AM EST
    Mrs Marcellus
    Bon appetite!

    DeLay Exits: Why Now? | 33 comments (33 topical)