Waiting for Fitzgerald

[Fair and Equitable]

Originally posted by Secret_Agent_Man
Why would you bother to hide behind a 15 post per year sock for this post?

S_A_M

Who's hiding jackass?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Spanky
Don't make me go searching for the quotes. You were using it as a point to critisize Bush and it was very important for you that I acknowledge that it was true. You kept bringing it up, and kept criticising me because I would not acknowledge it as fact.

It was not some neutral statement you brought up as "topical".

I find it irritating, though not outrageous, and I am ensaddened that this president, like others, would bend policy apparatus to political ends, but I brought it up because it related to the conversation y'all were having about the size of the budget deficit these days, and I kept talking about it only because you would not give a freaking inch and because I am as stubborn as the day is long.

[Gattigap]

Originally posted by Fair and Equitable
Who's hiding jackass?

So you've been lurking and biding your time for a year until someone chose to discuss Ronnie Earle?

Now that's discipline.

[Fair and Equitable]

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan

Yes. He's prosecuted just as many if not more Democrats as Republicans.

What's his record against the members of the different parties? At least two of his indictments against republicans have not resulted in convictions, specifically Kay Bailey Hutchison and Jim Mattox. This could be taken to indicate he only indicts Democrats you are actually criminals and indicts republicans for partisan reasons.

Of course, if you can see through your bile, perhaps you can review the indictment and tell us exactly what Delay did?

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
I find it irritating, though not outrageous, and I am ensaddened that this president, like others, would bend policy apparatus to political ends, but I brought it up because it related to the conversation y'all were having about the size of the budget deficit these days, and I kept talking about it only because you would not give a freaking inch and because I am as stubborn as the day is long.

I am amused that spanky is going all brit on us.

[Fair and Equitable]

Originally posted by Gattigap
So you've been lurking and biding your time for a year until someone chose to discuss Ronnie Earle?

Now that's discipline.

I'm guessing math isn't your strong point, but if you use a calculator and subtract out the number of my recent posts regarding Ronnie Earle, you might figure out that some of my massive post count didn't pertain to Ronnie Earle.

[baltassoc]

Originally posted by Fair and Equitable
This could be taken to indicate he only indicts Democrats you are actually criminals and indicts republicans for partisan reasons.

You know, I was going to post almost the same exact sentence satirically. This is better.

[Sexual Harassment Panda]

Originally posted by Fair and Equitable
What's his record against the members of the different parties? At least two of his indictments against republicans have not resulted in convictions, specifically Kay Bailey Hutchison and Jim Mattox. This could be taken to indicate he only indicts Democrats you are actually criminals and indicts republicans for partisan reasons.

Perhaps you could come up with some evidence for this ridiculous assertion. Otherwise, meh. Here's a thought - it could also mean Hutchison and Mattox got better lawyers. Perhaps they used the same ones OJ did?

Of course, if you can see through your bile, perhaps you can review the indictment and tell us exactly what Delay did?

There's this thing we occasionally do around here. It's called, for lack of a better term, "reading it yourself".

[baltassoc]

Originally posted by Sexual Harassment Panda

There's this thing we occasionally do around here. It's called, for lack of a better term, "reading it yourself".

Actually, unfortunately, he's got a point. The indictment doesn't accuse Delay of actually doing anything.

It's only going to lead to a conviction if one of the other two rolls over on him. Which is a possibility.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally posted by Fair and Equitable
What's his record against the members of the different parties? At least two of his indictments against republicans have not resulted in convictions, specifically Kay Bailey Hutchison and Jim Mattox. This could be taken to indicate he only indicts Democrats you are actually criminals and indicts republicans for partisan reasons.

You're an idiot. Jim Mattox isn't a Republican.

[SlaveNoMore]

baltassoc
Actually, unfortunately, he's got a point. The indictment doesn't accuse Delay of actually doing anything.

Wouldn't you litigation types immediately file a motion for dismissal for failure to state a claim?

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
Wouldn't you litigation types immediately file a motion for dismissal for failure to state a claim?

Now I know how you got five-to-ten on that moving violation. It was the pro-se motion for summary judgment you made at the scheduling hearing, right?

[SlaveNoMore]

ironweed
Now I know how you got five-to-ten on that moving violation. It was the pro-se motion for summary judgment you made at the scheduling hearing, right?

No, the moving violation was dropped.

I got the five-to-ten for bitch slapping the wise-ass litigator standing next to me.

[Fair and Equitable]

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
You're an idiot. Jim Mattox isn't a Republican.

I'll admit my mistake. He's been a crappy prosecutor of political "crimes" against members of both parties.

Now it's your turn, review the indictment (available at www.thesmokinggun.com) and tell us all what exactly Delay did. Or you could just pull a Sexually Repressed Panda move, pussy out and say I should read the indictment.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally posted by Fair and Equitable
I'll admit my mistake. He's been a crappy prosecutor of political "crimes" against members of both parties.

Now it's your turn, review the indictment (available at www.thesmokinggun.com) and tell us all what exactly Delay did. Or you could just pull a Sexually Repressed Panda move, pussy out and say I should read the indictment.

I've read the indictment and agree with balt that there's not much there against DeLay in the indictment aside from a general conspriacy charge. I have no doubts that the Grand Jury was persuaded that DeLay talked at length with Colyandro and Ellis about the TRM PAC, and I suspect one or more of them (or the corporate defendants in the previous indictments) will roll over on him.