Judge deals DeLay a setback (more Merry Earlemas)

[sonias]

http://www.statesman.com/news/content/metro/stories/12/18delaytrial.html
Ruling makes January trial less likely
A state district judge on Saturday dealt U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay a setback in his quest for a trial in January.

Judge Pat Priest canceled a Dec. 27 pre-trial hearing and refused to rule now whether DeLay, charged with conspiracy and money-laundering, could be tried in early January on the money-laundering charge alone. The decision could postpone DeLay's trial by weeks, if not months, unless his lawyers can get higher courts to intervene.

DeLay's co-defendants, John Colyandro of Austin and Jim Ellis of Washington, D.C., don't want a quick trial with DeLay.

bugman, roasting on an open fire
Ronnie Earle clipping off your nose,
Yuletide carols being sung by a choir,
And folks dressed up like jailbird hos.

Everybody knows you're turkey and a mofo,
Your indictment helps to make the season bright.
Tiny DUers with their eyes all aglow,
Will find it hard to sleep tonight.
:evilgrin:

Sonia

[Poet Lariat]

1. Nat King Cole just wafted through my living room...

Nothing like a good Christmas Carol to get you in a festive mood.

Now if it would just snow...:toast::hi::toast:

[WolverineDG]

2. ooooh, motions to sever

now if delay is pure as driven snow, why would his co-defendants not want a speedy trial with him? things that make you go hmmmmmmmm

dg

[GOPisEvil]

4. I was thinking the same thing.

His co-defendants are running from him like Carl Lewis! :rofl:

[Czolgosz]

3. No higher court would intervene in this ruling -- it would be such an

obvious case of special treatment that even the ultra-partisan-result-oriented Texas Supreme Court wouldn't want to fade that heat.

[NoPasaran]

5. Damn! I've got jury duty in January

Now I'll probably get stuck with some piddlyass lawsuit or something.

[sonias]

6. Even if you got a chance to make this jury NoPasaran

I can guarantee you that any triple-D Democrats would be challenged off the jury. Of course Dick DeGuerrin only gets 6 challenges, so maybe you might be lucky enough to make it by default.

That would be so sweet to be on this jury though. If by some miracle you make it you'll have to write a book about it.

We can always watch in the audience!

Sonia

[WolverineDG]

7. depends on how nopasaran answers the question

"are you capable of making your decision based on the facts presented & not your political beliefs?"

"of course i can, judge." O8)

aw, can't strike nopasaran for cause. sorry, tom. :cry: deguerin would have to want to burn one of his peremptory strikes on nopasaran...depending on what the jury pool consists of, he might want to chance nopasaran getting on the jury to strike someone else instead.

dg

[MagickMuffin]

8. DeLay may not be getting his trial in January,

but his good bud Abramoff will be, I think it's scheduled to start Jan. 9 :applause:

Fire up the :popcorn: machine

I'm not sure if the article from the Chron. was dicussed here, but I just ran across it.

The 35 to 40 investigators and prosecutors on the Abramoff case are focused on at least half a dozen members of Congress, lawyers and others close to the investigation said. The investigators are looking at payments made by Abramoff and his colleagues to the wives of some lawmakers and at actions taken by senior Hill aides, some of whom went to work for Abramoff at the law firm Greenberg Traurig, the sources.

Those under scrutiny

Former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Sugar Land, now facing separate campaign finance charges in Texas, is one of the members under scrutiny, the sources said. Others include Sen. Conrad Burns, R-Mont., Rep. John Doolittle, R-Calif., and several members of Congress involved with Indian affairs, one of Abramoff's key areas of interest.

Richard Cullen, an attorney for the DeLays, said Christine DeLay was hired by Buckham, an old family friend, to determine the favorite charity of every member of Congress. She was paid $3,200 to $3,400 a month for three years, or about $115,000 total, he said.

"It wasn't like she did this 9 to 5, but it was an ongoing project," Cullen said, noting her work was commensurate with the project and had nothing to do with her husband or any official congressional business. "This was something that she found to be very interesting, very ... worthwhile."

I guess I would find it very worthwhile indeed, $3200-$3400. a MONTH, very worthwhile indeed.
$115,000 for a job that she didn't have to work 9-5, sheesh I wonder what her hours were, once in a blue moon?


http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/printstory.mpl/front/3484962

Sonia, great song lyrics....