DeLay's Indictments A Strange Comedy?

Is it just me or is Congressman Tom DeLay (R-TX) fast turning his indictments into a soap comedy worthy of a major motion picture?

The Latest "DeLay" In The Justice Process

Tom DeLay has a new defense strategy. Accused, as he is, of using illegal funds to engineer a theft of power by Republicans from Democrats, he's clawing for any defense he can find. His latest "defense" is to request a new judge to oversee his case because the current one, Judge Bob Perkins, donated a few thousand dollars to the Democratic Party last year. Are judges not private citizens who are free to donate to their party of choice? Is DeLay saying that judges are all incapable of legal oversight because of their political beliefs? Because of the potential precedent involved, I believe this case should not be sent to another judge on these grounds. It opens the door to all manner of abuses of the system in future.

Is This In Reality A Fastball By DeLay?

In light of the potentially damaging precedent that could result if DeLay's request is honored, it's interesting to note that the next judge in line to deal with the case is a Republican judge, B.B. Schraub. Should prosecuting attorney Ronnie Earle say that a Republican judge would be biased in favor of DeLay since DeLay says a Democratic judge would be biased against him? The answer you came to, I hope, is in the negative. If we're willing to take a judge off a case simply for being Democrat or Republican, we'll soon be out of judges. The scary thing here is that that may be DeLay's intent in the first place. After all, if he could get a precedent set for Democratic judges not to rule on Republicans and vice versa, could he not cause enough confusion in the justice system to allow seemingly corrupt politicians such as himself more of a free reign on power, at least for awhile? It might seem unlikely but after all, evidence suggests he's a criminal and do criminals not play outside of the law?

TIL Recommends A New Strategy For DeLay

It would seem to any legal-minded American (or it should) that if DeLay is innocent, he should try defending himself with evidence instead of petty mudslinging. He has, after all, tried to have the case thrown out on legal technicalities and when that didn't work, he tried to accuse the grand jury of being tampered with. When that didn't work, he accused the jury of being biased. When that didn't work, he tried to get a new judge because he didn't like the current one. In addition, DeLay is now using money from his election campaign budget to pay for attack propaganda aimed at the prosecution. Is that not improper use of campaign funds? These are all very petty defenses. If DeLay is innocent as he claims, he should try to provide facts that prove his innocence instead of trying to bully his way through the justice system. It is interesting to note that though DeLay claims arrogantly claims his innocence and says he will be cleared of all charges, his two associates who stand charged don't seem to share his confidence. They've both told reporters that they hope the case will be dismissed or settled out of court in some other manner. That suggests they aren't confident that evidence will prove their and DeLay's innocence.

Conclusion

Tom DeLay's "defenses", though accepted lock, stock and barrel by most Republicans, have so far proven baseless. He has failed to provide any evidence so far to prove his innocence and has instead stooped to petty accusations and propaganda as a defense strategy. His failure to provide evidence seems damning but it would be unfair to make that accusation until the case is concluded. However, smoke and shadows won't be enough to get him out of this mess. He forgets the most important fact in all of this: It was the Grand Jury that indicted him, not Earle or Perkins. As Juror Veronica Dixon put it, "The only thing the grand jury bases its decisions on is the evidence presented to us. We had quite a lot of evidence."