Saturday, October 15, 2005

Weighing in on Charges against Tom Delay

The ugliness of politics continues to abound here in the Great State of Texas. I don’t claim to be any kind of expert on politics; far from it, I am simply an observer. Up until now I have held back my opinion of this latest bizarre, and that is the best word I can come up with, this bizarre set of circumstances which has blossomed into Indictments against a United States Senator.

In this morning’s Houston Chronicle I read an article ( link in title bar) by R. G. Ratcliffe where it seems that a key piece of evidence necessary for the State to make it’s case against Tom Delay or any of the other named “conspirators” is not to be had.

“But prosecutors said Friday in court that they only had a "similar" list and not the one allegedly received by then-RNC Deputy Director Terry Nelson. Late in the day, they released a list of 17 Republican candidates, but only seven are alleged to have received money in the scheme.”


“"Despite the fact that the state cannot conclusively prove that the said document is a duplicate (or copy thereof)" of the document given to Nelson, the "state believes that the document is at least factually related" to the document mentioned in the indictment, Reed said in a court brief filed after the hearing.”

I find it strikingly similar to those “original documents” that Dan Rather had, the ones he claimed proved without a question of a doubt that Bush was AWOL, the documents which were almost immediately proven to be fraudulent. It’s a sad day when the people who head up the prosecutor’s office unabashedly attempt to push through a very weak case at best that is based on nothing more than “similar to the original”, “duplicate” and then comes out and defends such an incredibly poor foundation by saying that, “the document is at least factually related”. "Factually related?", isn’t that the same as saying we have NO evidence; But, we “feel” certain that if we had some it would prove our case?

Here in America it’s okay to file charges against anyone, attempt to destroy their careers, destroy their name and all on some politically oriented scheme that has no evidence to back it up. I’m not saying that something illegal “may” or may not have gone on or that an investigation of those events was not in order; only that when the path leads to a dead end with no hard evidence, official charges cannot be permitted to be filed. Now the district attorney’s office claims that “if only we can have some more time to find evidence; fishing through private telephone billing receipts of anyone who might be the key to our case…”, sorry, that won’t float.

Carnival of Liberty XVI is coming soon, next Tuesday to be precise,

No comments: