A Texas grand jury indicted Rep. Tom DeLay (R-Tex.) yesterday for alleged involvement in money laundering related to the 2002 Texas election, raising new and more serious allegations than the conspiracy charge lodged against the former House majority leader last week.
The surprising new indictments followed by a matter of hours a motion by DeLay's Texas legal defense team to quash last week's charge on grounds that the Texas prosecutor in charge of the case lacked authority to bring it. The lawyers alleged that the crime of conspiracy was not covered by the state election law at the time of the alleged violation.
Later on Monday, a different grand jury -- which had no prior involvement in the case -- brought the new charges, which roughly match allegations made against two of DeLay's political associates one year ago.
DeLay has got some serious problems now. He's now facing two counts of conspiracy for committing money laundering, which if he's found guilty, could lead to prison time. The Post then details the two indictments, saying:
One count of the new indictment accuses DeLay of conspiracy to commit money laundering. It says he agreed with one or more associates to launder $190,000 in corporate contributions through an arm of the Republican National Committee in Washington, allowing the funds to be passed illegally into the election campaigns of Republican candidates in Texas. Texas law prohibits the use of corporate money in political campaigns.
The aim of the assistance was to ensure that Republicans could gain control of the Texas House, and thus reorder the state's congressional districts in a manner that would favor the election of Republicans. The stratagem worked: Five more Republicans were elected to the U.S. House from the state last year, making it harder for Democrats to wrest control of Congress.
The other new count alleges that DeLay and the two associates "did knowingly, conduct, supervise, and facilitate" the transfer of the $190,000 to Washington and back to Texas in violation of the state's money-laundering statutes. Last week's conspiracy charge, in contrast, involved the state's election law, and it was that linkage that DeLay's attorneys challenged.
What really intrigues me about this story is how quickly this new gran jury was able to come together and--without any involvement in the case--issue new indictments against DeLay regarding this money laundering scandal. This makes me wonder how much evidence does the prosecution have against DeLay? There's also another little twist regarding this scandal. In the New York Times:
The new [DeLay] indictment was issued as Bush administration officials confirmed news reports in London that the Justice Department had asked the British police to question former Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher about the circumstances of her meeting in 2000 with Mr. DeLay during a trip to Britain organized by the Washington lobbyist Jack Abramoff.
A spokesman in London for the former prime minister, speaking on condition that he not be identified by name, acknowledged that the British police had recently contacted Mrs. Thatcher to "clarify" details of the meeting that she had with Mr. DeLay when he visited London in May 2000.
The spokesman was quoted by The Press Association, the British news agency, as saying that Mrs. Thatcher would cooperate with investigators and that the meeting with Mr. DeLay, which she had previously acknowledged, was a "courtesy call" at which no business of any sort was conducted.
In Washington, a Bush administration law enforcement official, speaking on condition of anonymity because of grand jury secrecy rules, confirmed that the interview request had been made to the British police as part of the investigation of Mr. Abramoff, a Republican lobbyist once described by Mr. DeLay as being among his "closest and dearest friends." The official said that Mrs. Thatcher was not suspected of any wrongdoing.
The interview request to Mrs. Thatcher was first reported in Monday's editions of The Mirror, a British newspaper, which said it had obtained a briefing paper prepared by the British Home Office about the Justice Department's reasons for questioning Mrs. Thatcher.
The newspaper quoted the document as saying that "U.S. officials are investigating whether Abramoff was involved in obtaining legislative assistance from public officials in exchange for arranging and underwriting trips to the U.K." Federal bribery laws bar members of Congress and other government employees from accepting money or other favors in exchange for official actions.
The document said that the Justice Department investigation involved "high-profile American and U.K.-based individuals, including a leading congressman and former Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher," the newspaper reported.
So Tom DeLay met with Margaret Thatcher in London, on a business trip that was organized by Jack Abramoff. That opens up a whole new can of worms--not just for Abramoff, but also for DeLay. What was the purpose of that trip for Abramoff and DeLay? What was said in the meetings between DeLay and Thatcher? What 'legislative assistance' did Abramoff expect to get from DeLay[?] in exchange for these London trips? What did DeLay do on his return home, regarding this 'legislation' and did it assist Abramoff, or the clients he represented--and who were those clients?
This scandal is getting messy.
No comments:
Post a Comment