Posted on 09/23/2013 4:47:09 AM PDT by iowamark
Sliding under the radar on Thursday was the announcement that former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay had been exonerated of all charges stemming from the politically motivated prosecution orchestrated by Democrat shill and former Travis County (TX) district attorney Ronnie Earle.
That’s right. Exonerated. The Texas Court of Appeals ruled that not only was the evidence presented not sufficient to sustain a conviction but that no law had even been broken. So after nearly a decade since the original indictment, Tom DeLay is a free man though he is deeply in debt from the protracted litigation and his political career lies in ruins.
Ronnie Earle is no stranger to weaponizing the law in the service of the Democrat . A quick look at his career shows that he made a habit of targeting Republican politicians for indictments on the most bizarre of pretexts. And unfortunately Ronnie Earle, a tiny man devoid of honor and integrity, will continue to walk free despite the lives he has ruined out of spite and political ambition.
Ronnie Earle, though, represents a substantial and profoundly dangerous train of thought within the Democrat party which seeks to criminalize political differences. Historically, one of the traditions that has separated the United States and nations like Great Britain from the third world is that politics is not a bloodsport. Unlike Egypt and Pakistan we don’t imprison and execute former leaders because when you know you are going to be hanged if you lose and election you tend to have the army vote for you.
This started in a big way under Ronald Reagan when the Democrat Congress, frustrated by Reagan’s insistence on fighting communism in Central America (communist aggression that was fully supported by our current Secretary of State), decided to prosecute Reagan staffers for pursuing the policy.
Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich was harassed for years on bogus “ethics” charges in retaliation for him having wrested what had been a Democrat fiefdom from the Democrats.
Fast forward to the Bush (43) administration and we have the spectacle of Scooter Libby being prosecuted for something… no one exactly sure what. We have Justice department staffers put in judicial jeopardy for replacing political appointees… these being people who are appointed by the President and whom can be removed at his pleasure… who were compliant with the demands of various Democrat politicos with others not so compliant.
The conviction of Tom DeLay, though, represented a nadir even by the standards of Democrats. DeLay’s PAC followed campaign finance law, obtained advisory opinions, and did what virtually every other PAC did but somehow the morally obtuse Ronnie Earle decided that handing the Democrat’s ass to them in the House was a crime that merited a prison sentence.
One is torn on how to proceed on this. On the one hand it is obvious that if such behavior degenerates into a tit-for-tat then the political fabric of the nation may be irreparably damaged. On the other hand, if you don’t extract some retaliation then the Democrats, being bullies to the depths of what passes for their soul, will be emboldened to even greater excesses.
Sarah Palin was wise enough to escape these types of vindictive and harassing lawsuits.
She is still taking heat for resigning the governorship, but while governor, she was a perpetual target.
Damned if you do, damned if you don’t...
Aren’t there statutes for malicious prosecution? How did that Duke Lacrosse prosecutor in NC get nailed?
There needs to be some sort of legal recourse relief valve that allows those maliciously prosected, like DeLay, to go after unethical prosecutors. I fear that without such, eventually we’re going to have someone who’s life gas been destroyed conclude they have nothing to lose and go Al Capone on their tormentor and the tormentors family. At that point we basically turn into ... Columbia.
“Aren’t there statutes for malicious prosecution?”
Yes there are. Trouble is they would have to be brought in Travis County, the giant RATs nest where all this started.
of what?because he refused to pardon Libby.
The other possibility is that Bush didn’t think his integrity was worth the political heat pardoning Libby would have brought down on him. But we know that Colin Powell “putted” Valerie Plame - to the extent that anyone actually did. Which is to say, "not at all," since we know Valerie Plame wasn’t covert, and hadn’t been for five years.
and I pray he throws his hat back in the ring - wish he could sue thelife out of all those who did this to him
The Realists had nothing to gain in that. The NeoCons did. You can't say which NeoCon. Either Libby, or maybe Libby was taking the fall for Cheney.
One thing that I have noticed. A lot of people want to go back and argue the issue based on the facts that were known at the time.
But eventually, all of the NeoCons acknowledged that all of the "intelligence" was in error.
The NeoCons said that were fooled by the faulty intelligence like everybody else was initially fooled. But most people think that NeoCons knew all along that the intelligence was faulty, and that the NeoCons played a role in contriving or faking the faulty or fake intelligence.
As for what you say about Bush not wanting to suffer the political heat for pardoning Libby, the political heat for not pardoning Libby was far worse.
Amen.
The “political heat” he may have gotten from not pardoning Libby was nothing compared to the firestorm he could have expected had he done so. Stalin is said to have asked how many divisions the Pope had; Bush could just as well ask how many newspapers conservatives have.
But because Bush didn't pardon Libby, the right(especially the NeoCons) have ostracized Bush. Bush is Persona non Grata in the GOP.
I remember it too. The Hammer was brought down but George Soros’ Republcan hit group. It worked.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.