Links
Archives
- 01/01/2004 - 02/01/2004
- 11/01/2004 - 12/01/2004
- 12/01/2004 - 01/01/2005
- 01/01/2005 - 02/01/2005
- 02/01/2005 - 03/01/2005
- 03/01/2005 - 04/01/2005
- 04/01/2005 - 05/01/2005
- 05/01/2005 - 06/01/2005
- 06/01/2005 - 07/01/2005
- 07/01/2005 - 08/01/2005
- 08/01/2005 - 09/01/2005
- 09/01/2005 - 10/01/2005
- 10/01/2005 - 11/01/2005
- 11/01/2005 - 12/01/2005
- 12/01/2005 - 01/01/2006
- 01/01/2006 - 02/01/2006
- 02/01/2006 - 03/01/2006
- 03/01/2006 - 04/01/2006
- 04/01/2006 - 05/01/2006
- 05/01/2006 - 06/01/2006
- 06/01/2006 - 07/01/2006
- 07/01/2006 - 08/01/2006
- 08/01/2006 - 09/01/2006
- 09/01/2006 - 10/01/2006
- 10/01/2006 - 11/01/2006
- 11/01/2006 - 12/01/2006
- 12/01/2006 - 01/01/2007
- 01/01/2007 - 02/01/2007
- 02/01/2007 - 03/01/2007
- 03/01/2007 - 04/01/2007
- 04/01/2007 - 05/01/2007
- 07/01/2007 - 08/01/2007
- 08/01/2007 - 09/01/2007
- 09/01/2007 - 10/01/2007
- 10/01/2007 - 11/01/2007
- 07/01/2008 - 08/01/2008
A tribute to Condoleeza Rice and George W. Bush who, despite voluminious evidence to the contrary, said, "I don't think anybody could have predicted that these people would take an airplane and slam it into the World Trade Center, take another one and slam it into the Pentagon, that they would try to use an airplane as a missile," adding that "even in retrospect" there was "nothing" to suggest that" and "I don't think anyone anticipated the breach of the levees," respectively.
Tuesday, October 04, 2005
Innocent Till Proven Guilty (R): Guilty Till Proven Innocent (D)
The "innocent till proven guilty" mantra is sure to be repeated ad nauseum by the right-wing, hate chorus in the case of Tom Delay. To be sure, party affiliation often plays a role in how the perpetrator is viewed. In this case, Delay is the victim of a renegade district attorney with a partisan vendetta against "the hammer" who is simply an innocent victim of street-fighting politics. Naturally, Mr. Delay gets his day in court where the case should be tried, not in the media which it seems is where his defenders believe they have a better chance of prevailing.
Let's assume for the moment that the substantive charges of money laundering are true. This would mean that someone at the RNC was either in on the scam, mind-numbingly incompetent, or both. Can we look forward to an indictment of someone at the RNC any time soon?
And if someone at the RNC was a party to this activity, does this fall under the provisions of the RICO act? Are there other instances where the RNC was used to launder money, not just in Texas, but in other states as well? How high up in the party hierarchy does this corruption go? Does any of this activity fall within the broad definitions of wire and mail fraud? If so, which federal laws were broken as well?
|
Let's assume for the moment that the substantive charges of money laundering are true. This would mean that someone at the RNC was either in on the scam, mind-numbingly incompetent, or both. Can we look forward to an indictment of someone at the RNC any time soon?
And if someone at the RNC was a party to this activity, does this fall under the provisions of the RICO act? Are there other instances where the RNC was used to launder money, not just in Texas, but in other states as well? How high up in the party hierarchy does this corruption go? Does any of this activity fall within the broad definitions of wire and mail fraud? If so, which federal laws were broken as well?
