Restricted money goes out, unrestricted money comes back – the very definition of “money laundering”. DeLay either is lying or he does not believe that the law applies to him. I am quite certain that DeLay and his lawyer are familiar with the concept of money laundering.
DeLay makes pejorative statements about the court and the jury foreman, then claims he is not criticizing the jury. Might as well ask how hard it was for the prosecutor to find a court that was not biased in favor of republicans. Or maybe the grand jury “just sworn in” was the only one not yet corrupted? (Is there a standing Grand Jury, or are they all “just sworn in”?)
He was prosecuted because he was so successful in redistricting Texas? The republicans were so successful that the courts found they had illegally disenfranchised an entire segment of the voters.
Political prosecution? Political crime!
They claim that he was prosecuted because the Democrats turned people against politicians and Washington? Spin, Spin, Spin. Project, Project, Project. Lie, Lie, Lie.
There was no corporate money, except that Citizens United made it legal, except that the ruling was not in effect at the time of the crime, except … Their arguments are all over the map because they have no moral compass.
They will delay and appeal until political change gives him a free pass. It’s what Microsoft did ten years ago.
Do you think he will ever spend a day in jail?
No. Simply because the Court of Criminal Appeals is an elected court, it’s all Republican, it’s highly political. It’s known as a prosecutors’ court, but in this case I would bet that they’re going to rule for the defendant. The Third Court of Appeals, where the appeal will start, is also a Republican court.
Lou Dubose, via Salon.com
- “Tom DeLay Sentenced to Three Years in Prison” and related posts (news.firedoglake.com)
- The end of Tom DeLay (salon.com)
Ooo, right out of the fear-monger’s handbook.
Interpol does not do field work. It is an information clearinghouse and facilitator. Law enforcement is done by local agencies under local laws. Period.
Interpol is accountable to US law. Executive Order 13524 adds some standard exemptions from those laws. The new protections can be revoked, as they were granted, with the stroke of a pen.
When Reagan first recognized Interpol, they had no personnel stationed on United States soil. Information we shared with them was held in a foreign country, outside our jurisdiction. That changed when they opened an office at the United Nations. The new change effectively restores the same protections that INTERPOL had to begin with, nothing more. There has been no expansion of Interpol authority or surrender of US sovereignty.
“The new order does not enable or authorize INTERPOL or its officials to conduct searches or seizures, make arrests or take any other law enforcement actions in the United States.”
INTERPOL is limited to working through the Department of Justice.
This change simply protects the Interpol personnel, and the information we choose to share with them, and the information they have acquired from other countries and keep on United States soil, from further prying. If you want to know what was shared, then FOIA the DoJ. Odds are they will not share information in an ongoing investigation either. It’s just that now you can’t go around them by attacking Interpol clerks.
As INTERPOL has no investigative or enforcement authority in the United States, the Fourth Amendment is not applicable.
The Mexican government is in a tight corner. They cannot fight the cartels on their own, and they cannot maintain their sovereignty if they allow in all the help they need. The main market for the drugs is not in their country, so they cannot do anything to undermine demand in a meaningful way. They can’t even cut off the gun supply.
Like it or not, we are the source of their problems, and we have not done all we could to kill off the drug trade or gun running or money laundering.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
- Critics say Mexico needs to learn from Colombia (sfgate.com)