Political lighting rod, House Majority leader Rep. Tom DeLay, was indicted Wednesday by a Texas grand jury today for conspiracy involving campaign finance. DeLay has temporarily temporarily relinquished his leadership post. Speaker Dennis Hastert will recommend that Rep. David Dreier of California step into those duties. The Republican rank and file may meet as early as Wednesday night to act on Hastert’s recommendation.
The Associated Press reports on the indictment:
The indictment accused [Rep.] DeLay of a conspiracy to “knowingly make a political contribution” in violation of Texas law outlawing corporate contributions. It alleged that DeLay’s Texans for a Republican Majority political action committee accepted $155,000 from companies, including Sears Roebuck, and placed the money in an account.
The PAC then wrote a $190,000 check to an arm of the Republican National Committee and provided the committee a document with the names of Texas State House candidates and the amounts they were supposed to received in donations.
The indictment included a copy of the check.
“The defendants entered into an agreement with each other or with TRMPAC (Texans for a Republican Majority Political Action Committee) to make a political contribution in violation of the Texas election code,” says the four-page indictment. “The contribution was made directly to the Republican National Committee within 60 days of a general election.”DeLay’s spokesman wasn’t impressed, calling Ronnie Earle just about every name in the book.
DeLay spokesman blasts prosecutor – [CNN]
Hmmmm.
This is a repost of something I posted over on RedState.org. I’m reposting it here because I have no intention of re-writing it. 🙂
YMMV.
—————-
Hmmmm.
Interesting.
1. Delay did an interview with Brit Hume yesterday (Wednesday) where he explain the routing of the corporate donations.
A. Corporation donates to Texas PAC.
B. Texas PAC delivers money to RNC.
C. RNC deposits money into non-campaign account dedicated to RNC administrative purposes. I.e. “soft” money.
D. RNC cuts a series of checks to various Texas Republican candidates from a completely different account dedicated to lawful campaign purposes. I.e. “hard” money.
The essence of this technique is that the money is never comingled and that the corporate donations are themselves not used for any illicit purpose.
However the indictment itself does not in any way, shape or form acknowledge steps “C” and “D” and instead combines the two without acknowledging that the money isn’t comingled. While the indictment doesn’t specifically state so, the intent is that the reader assumes the money is in fact comingled since it leaves out the existence of the two separately controlled accounts by the RNC.
Since Earle was apprised of this by Delay and his attorneys, according to Delay in that Brit Hume interview, that means this omission is deliberate.
So….
This means that Earle is either alleging that the RNC did in fact comingle the money before writing those checks
or
That the RNC maintaining two separate accounts is not a defense against this charge. That comingling of funds is not necessary to violate this Texas law and that any corporate donations cannot be used to offset expenses in order to free up money for campaigns.
Hmmm.
Frankly I don’t believe the RNC is dumb enough to do the former. And I specifically don’t believe Delay is dumb enough to be involved in the former either.
And the latter option is, IMHO, just completely absurd.
Texas Election Code:
http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/statutes/el.toc.htm
Ok.
253.003:
“(a) A person may not knowingly make a political contribution in violation of this chapter.
(b) A person may not knowingly accept a political contribution the person knows to have been made in violation of this chapter.”
253.094:
“(a) A corporation or labor organization may not make a political contribution or political expenditure that is not authorized by this subchapter.”
253.104:
“(a) A corporation or labor organization may make a contribution from its
own property to a political party to be used as provided by Chapter 257.
(b) A corporation or labor organization may not knowingly make a contribution authorized by Subsection (a) during a period beginning on the 60th day before the date of a general election for
state and county officers and continuing through the day of the election.”
This is interesting:
257.002:
“(b) A political party that accepts contributions authorized by Section 253.104 shall maintain the contributions in a separate account.”
Which describes what the RNC has setup in it’s transactions with the Texas PAC.
Frankly I think the important section is 253.032 which covers “Limitation on contribution by Out-of-State Committee”. In essence these sections prohibit the direct contribution of corporate donations to campaigns in Texas which also require these donations to be maintained in a separate account and reported on regularly.
However there is, from what I can find out, nothing that forbids either generally, specifically or tangentially a shifting of funds as described by Delay.
I wonder if it’s possible for Delay to sue Earle and Travis County.
Hmmmm.
@ Peter F.
“1. Exactly how many “Texas State House candidates” received a portion of this money? 1? 2? 14?”
Not a clue. And somewhat immaterial really. If it’s illegal then it’s just as illegal with one as with twenty. *shrug* I know I’m telling you something you already know. It’s really for anyone else reading this.
2. What are there limits PACs can donate to a candidate in Texas? $10,000? Or none at all? It’s not terribly clear.
It depends on whether or not the PAC has a treasurer. Without a treasurer the PAC cannot donate more than $500 to a candidate. Though that limit might be lifted if there’s some additional reporting done by the PAC and the candidate. On the other hand if the PAC has a treasurer, no limit on how much a PAC can give.
The primary limitation is on the *source* of the money, not on the amounts. And that limitations is on whether or not the donation was by an individual or a corporation. If the donation was by an individual, then I think the limit in Texas is $100 per individual donating. If the donation is from a corporation, then the limitation is based on date/time and is restricted 60 days prior to an election.
3. “The contribution was made directly to the Republican National Committee within 60 days of a general election.” Before or after the elections? And why would it matter 60 days after the election? Would the 61st day be OK? What gives?
The money given by the Texas PAC to the RNC has no limitations. The limitations are on *corporate* donations TO a Texas candidate. There are no limitations to the amounts of money transferred between local PACs, national PACs or local vs national PACs.
The limitation comes into play when the money goes to a candidate. The 60 day limit is on corporate donations that end up in the campaign of a candidate.
4. What needs to be establish is whether or not those contributions were made directly on behalf of the corporations or from individuals (likely higher ups) within the corporations. Is it at all possible a CEO at Sears wrote out the check on the company checkbook (not an impossibility mind you) and sent it to DeLay’s PAC?
The corporations made the checks. I.e. a corporation is, to an extent, an individual entity unto itself. A CEO can write a check for himself. Or he can write a check on behalf of a corporation. This same mechanism is used in forfeiture cases where your *house* is considered to be an individual entity that doesn’t have explicit constitutional rights afforded by the US, or state, constitutions.
I.e. in a forfeiture case charges are brought against your *house* and if your *house* is found guilty, the *house* is forfeited. Wierd but true, YMMV. I.e. non-human entities are treated as individuals of a sort. This is also how Arthur Andersen Consulting was found guilty.
5. Is DeLay directly involved in the day-to-day operations of his PAC? (I doubt it, he’s likely far too busy in D.C. with other things.)
According to his interview with Brit Hume yesterday at about 6:45pm EST, the answer is no. Delay helped setup the PAC and then turned over the day to day operations. He did help with some fund raising and allowed the PAC to use his name and likeness, but evidently he didn’t run the PAC.
Anybody else wondering these things,too? Do they matter? Just curious.”
IANAL so take everything with some serious salt. But that’s my reading of this nonsense.
RE: Purple Avenger’s insight (September 29, 2005 01:35 PM)
“Why does it take 13 paragraphs to get the crux of the indictment?”
The “MEGO factor” (My Eyes Glaze Over). The NYT wants you to read and accept the headline meme then become comatose before you find out that there is no “there” there.
——
Yes. Another tip: Read the last paragraph of a long story first. Oftentimes that saves you a lot of effort. I usually do that to get through the spin of my local rag.
Good tip, AD. (Also works for long moonbat comments on blogs:) )
Jim Kouri, Vice President of the National Association of Chiefs of Police, has written on the DeLay matter: 9/29/05 article entitled:
Delay’s Prosecutor Pals with Dan Rather’s Daughter and Ben Barnes.
Deja vu all over again! Same old crowd at it again.
Remember Ben Barnes? The ex-Texas Lt. Gov. who appeared on CBS 60 Minutes – the CBSgate show. The same Barnes who claimed to have pulled strings for George Bush at a time when Barnes wasn’t even in office.
Link: See “Posted by: Kathleen on September 12, 2004 12:09 PM”