1. Anonymous says:

    And does anyone think this is the end of DeLay’s legal trouble? What stupid reporting to think further indictments won’t out DeLay, the architect of the current Republican majority in the House, back in the news.

    And does anyone think this is the lasr Abramoff indictment?

    This will buy Republicans a week at best. Once the smoke clears, and people realize they have to rely on Boehner, Frist and Bush for leadership, the rats will start looking for an exit.

  2. Anonymous says:

    NPR included the Abramoff connection (though I don’t think they mentioned Rudy by name, just position). But they presented it as this great A-Ha. About 1 minute into the coverage. â€Well why now then.†â€Hey, guess what? One of DeLay’s associates pled guilty three days ago!â€

  3. Anonymous says:

    This is how you handle DeLay’s statements if you’re Mike Allen: DeLay denies any wrongdoing.

    Done. Anything more, given the material he was provided, is unjustified.

    And how pathetic a commentary on the House Ethics Committee is this, by the way? Three â€admonishments†in the past, and no action at all for a year and a half on a case that’s caused the Majority Leader of the House to resign from Congress and sent his staff to prison.

  4. Anonymous says:

    Yeah, I guess you’re right, Kagro.

    I like Josh Marshall’s idea, of going after the folks who voted for DeLay’s rule. It’s a really valuable use of a voice vote, IMO, to link DeLAy to those who tried to protect him.

    After all, Buckham almost certainly WILL go down. And then DeLay. If we can generate some media attention on it in time for the DeLay announcement, then the resignation will only help them by making it a special election rather than a regular.

  6. Anonymous says:

    Sally,

    I was thinking of starting a pool.

    Though, with DeLay you might only get about 4 months of lobbying before he goes to the slammer. So you don’t want to give him a big annual contract or anything.

  7. Anonymous says:

    â€I’m curious about the way Cullen describes these emails. None are from DeLay. They were turned over willingly. Does that mean they chose not to turn over a bunch more, emails that are from DeLay?â€

    I don’t think DeLay uses e-mail. So while his subordinates’ e-mail might have damning stuff, there are no e-mails actually written by DeLay.

  9. Anonymous says:

    Jim E. is right. The Newsweek article that came out the other day noted that DeLay doesn’t email.

  11. Anonymous says:

    DeLay apparently doesn’t e-mail, according to his lawyer. That’s why there are none from him. From Newsweek :

    [DeLay lawyer] Cullen says DeLay had no knowledge of improper dealings by his aides. (He also says the e-mails he gave the Feds don’t include any directly from DeLay because the congressman, unlike his aides, doesn’t e-mail.) DeLay â€has never taken any official action based on anything other than his conscience,†he says.

  12. Anonymous says:

    I think the issue to use against Republicans is who took money from DeLay’s PACs? Unlike with the voice vote, the receipt of PAC money is clearly tracable — in fact I would give it a name, â€Money from the DeLay Temple of Corruption.