The Bull Moose writes:
The Moose notes the end of the “revolution”.
Tom DeLay will not return as Majority Leader of the House of Representatives. Whatever the outcome of his upcoming trial, he is finished as a Republican Leader. He sealed his doom when he suggested that there was no more fat to be cut out of the federal government. His right wing base both outside and inside the House will now be far less likely to stick with him.
DeLay has become for the Republicans what Jim Wright somewhat unfairly became for the Democrats in the early ’90s – a symbol of an entrenched, corrupt establishment…
Frist did not help things along with the revelation that his blind trust can see. And this is just the beginning…
We have entered the season of the indictments – Delay, Abramoff and the Plame investigation will soon come to a head. C-Span will merge with Court T.V. The challenge for the Democrats is to seize the mantle of reform. Perhaps, Newt should become a donkey consultant – after all his Presidential ambition is a big beneficiary of the DeLay indictment.
I am not so sure about the end of the ‘revolution,’ considering I don’t think they have been behaving like Republicans for a while now. Took me a while to figure that out. I do think he is right that whatever the outcome of the trial, DeLay is done. Even if he is acquitted or removed from the indictment, he is damaged goods. Some will argue that like in professional sports, a player should not lose his position due to injury (or an indictment that turns out to be unsubstantiated, should that be the case).
Tell that to Wally Pipp (although that is nonsense- Pipp was going to be replaced anyway– but you get the point).
An excellent piece from Josh Trevino.
ET
I wonder if Delay has been talking to Newt, Livingston, Lott and similar leadership about trying to be boss after getting wounded like that.
Steve
The question, John, is: Can you really expect to ever elect a conservative majority that embraces conservatism as you see it? Can you expect a majority to believe so strongly in limited government that they limit their own power? Can you expect a majority to be so fiscally responsible that they give up the pork programs that help get them re-elected? How many Republicans who ran on a term-limits pledge ended up breaking it?
You could make an analogy to communism. Something you hear a lot is “It looks good on paper, but it doesn’t account for actual human nature.” Well, by the same token, you have to wonder if conservatism takes into account the actual nature of politicians. With as much power as a United States Senator or Congressman enjoys, can you really expect them to voluntarily surrender that power? As individuals, some have principles, sure. But as a group, as a majority, it’s hard to hold onto them. And the more power you get, the harder it is to set it aside.
What I’m suggesting is that you didn’t simply get stuck with a bad batch. There is a fundamental disconnect between what you want and what a group of politicians is likely to give you.
Davebo
I’d say Delay is going to be among (including Frist) the folks blamed for the demise of the GOP’s majority.
And that’s really stupid. In fact, it’s just passing blame from the real culprit.
Doug
I think maybe we’re seeing the Madisonian checks kicking in a bit. Government power will ebb and flow and never be quite where we want it to be. But Madison’s design for the government was to balance ambition against ambition. Candidate against Candidate. House against Senate against Presidency against State against Local. The higher the pedestal a person builds for himself, the easier it is to topple.
Gratefulcub
Trevino’s logic confuses me
a bully that values his own power above all else, that didn’t have the best interests in his cause at heart, and that tells us all we need to know about the man. But in the same breath, he is obviously innocent?
Sure, I am biased. But, it appears to me that even if he is ‘innocent’ of this charge, he has gotten away with much worse. being a power hungry bully and all.
Defense Guy
I’d say your counting your chickens before they are hatched. This will end up having little to no effect on the GOP majority, and I doubt Bush’s current numbers will either.
Gratefulcub
I disagree with what I believe your thought is. I do think the scandals that have begun and the ones coming down the pike will influence American’s opionion of the pres, and the republican congress. But i agree that the GOP majority is here to stay.
The Senate is a lost cause due to all the states that will vote GOP regardless of any actual events. There are blue states too, just not as many (just all the population centers). The house has been gerrymandered to the point that incumbents don’t lose. Delay will probably be re-elected if he is sitting in a jail awaiting trial.
srv
Yes, the prototypical modern conservative ala Tom Delay is here to stay. He is still the model for aspiring Republicans to emulate. Except the getting indicted part.
jg
Tell that to Drew Bledsoe.
Davebo
This will end up having little to no effect on the GOP majority, and I doubt Bush’s current numbers will either.
So you’re guessing the Senate and House Republicans will crab walk away from both Delay and Bush at double time?
You could well be right I suppose, but I think it will be too little too late.
Vladi G
Whatever. A piece he concludes with:
Of course, he provides no evidence for any of this, save for essentially saying that all of Earle’s political enemies have been acquitted (apparently, as noted in the thread, it’s only his friends that get convicted).
I know next to nothing about Earle aside from his record. Can someone please point out evidence of being a hacktacular partisan as it relates to performing his duties as a prosecutor? He may be left of Marx in his private life, but is there any evidence that he, in his professional capacity, is unduly partisan?
Doug
His grand jury indicted Tom DeLay. Res ipsa loquitur
Gratefulcub
That is what I asked in another thread. Is there anyone out there that can give us an honest answer to this question? No evidence for his hacktacularness has been provided, as far as i have seen.
i read trevino, and jonah goldberg, and a couple of other right leaners, and it was all the same: OBVIOUSLY, Earl is a political hack. I am trying to stay open minded on this question, but i have only seen evidence of him being fair, and the only arguments against have been ‘obviously he is a hack.’
Vladi G
I meant outside of wingnut talking points.
jg
They either play ball or they’re partisan hacks.
Stormy70
Ronnie also indicted Kay Bailey Hutchinson and Jim Mattox to no avail. He also drops indictments against corporations that give to his pet causes. There is some hackery involved if you’ve seen this guy operate in Texas. However, we shall see about Delay. I don’t trust most Congress-critters, as a whole.
Texas Dems hate, hate, hate Delay for the redistricting in Texas. They ran away to neighboring states, but it still went through. Texas is now red, through and through.
Blue Neponset
I don’t understand why you think Trevino’s comments are excellent. In one breath he claims this is the end of Tom Delay and the next he claims the charges against Delay are baseless. I find it hard to believe that ‘The Hammer’ can’t weather one baseless charge from a “Democratic hack and dishonest prosecutor”.
If DeLay can be taken down via this baseless charge then my guess is DeLay’s time has been up for a while now. Ronnie Earle is doing you and your Repub buddies a favor by giving you an excuse to walk away from Tom DeLay.
Stormy70
I see it that way. Blunt would be more effective than Delay.
Pb
Actually Stormy, Texas is precisely as red as it always was–but at the same time, its leadership is now less representative of its citizenry. Gotta love the gerrymander.
rayabacus
I don’t think there is anything to this. I personally do not think much of DeLay and if this indictment removes him and gets Blunt in I’m OK with that. The indictment was pretty well shredded here.
http://junkyardblog.net/archives/week_2005_09_25.html#004914
Bruce from Missouri
****I am not so sure about the end of the ‘revolution,’ considering I don’t think they have been behaving like Republicans for a while now. Took me a while to figure that out.*****
What do you mean? They have absolutely been behaving like republicans. They get immediately corrupt whenever they get power….
Have we forgotten Iran/Contra? Watergate? Teapot Dome? It’s not a Republican Administration if there aren’t people going to the big house.
jg
Fucking commies.
Mike
I love this comment that from Bruce Reed of the DLC that The Bullmoose links to:
“For more than a decade, DeLay has marshaled the K Street Project to muscle lobbying firms, trade associations, and companies into hiring only Republicans and not Democrats. Republicans didn’t launch the K Street Project out of greed or partisan animosity. They had a more devious goal: to corner the lobbyist market. DeLay understood what a central and permanent role the lobbying community plays in the Washington scene: writing campaign checks; providing technical expertise; and offering every player in the cyclical business of politics a profession to fall back on.”
Democrats need their own K Street Project — not to get more Democrats hired as lobbyists, but to reform the political system so that Washington lives by a clear set of rules that protect the public interest. ”
So among his otherwise pretty decent prescriptions for good government he throws this in, which essentially says “The Republicans have stacked the Lobbying deck agaist us, so rather than get rid of the lobbyists altogether, let’s get more of our OWN lobbyists. Cause naturally THEY’LL protect the public interest. ”
Amazing. And people in Washington wonder why everybody thinks they’re a bunch of sleazebags.
Stormy70
Earl was being very vague about that indictment at his press conference today. Earle failed spectacularly (too lazy to look up) with Kay Bailey Hutchinson’s indictment. He is known for his political witchhunts in Texas, make of it what you will.
Texas is majority Republican, why shouldn’t it’s legislature reflect it?
Stormy70
Hah!
Stormy70
Mark Twain nails it.
Steve
Heh, “shredded” if you are a layman who thinks a bunch of legal citations mean the person must know what they’re talking about. Fact is, it’s real easy to throw up a cite and say “See! There’s an exemption for federal officeholders, wow what a frivolous case.” But if there really was a clear flaw of that sort in the indictment, it would be trivial for DeLay’s lawyers to obtain a dismissal within a matter of weeks. DeLay would never have to go to trial if he has a defense to the charges as a matter of law.
So, wait and see what happens, but be wary of people who tell you “this indictment is obviously frivolous for 18 reasons.” Lots of people make shoddy legal arguments on the Internet because 99% of readers won’t know any better.
Mike
“Bruce from Missouri Says:
Have we forgotten Iran/Contra? Watergate? Teapot Dome? It’s not a Republican Administration if there aren’t people going to the big house.”
Tammany Hall in New York?
Richard Daley in Chicago?
Huey Long in Louisiana?
Joseph Kennedy buying votes in WVA?
Tenn Sen. John Ford (Uncle of Rep. Harold Ford)?
You’re right, the list just goes on and on…
DougJ
If no one else gets indicted, I suspect DG is right that this won’t have *that* much effect. But with Rove, Bob Ney, and Frist being investigated too, someone else will get indicted. Personally, I hope not Frist, because while what he did might have been illegal it is not part of a larger pattern of corruption (IMHO).
I don’t see how Ney avoids getting indicted. On Rove, who knows, but Fitz has to indict someone so I think either Rove or Libby gets it. Frist — I hope not, but who knows?
So if I had to guess, I would guess that will say at least three relatively major figures indicted by spring 2006. That would hurt a lot.
DougJ
Stormy, you’re totally out to lunch here. Earle has investigated 11 Democrats and 4 Republicans. He’s not partisan and he is not known for witch hunts.
You probably loved him when he was doing Dems and now you hate him ’cause he’s doing Republicans. The way I see it, either way he’s doing his job.
Call me gleeful if you like. I don’t like crooks. I didn’t like Rostenkowski and his gang in 1994 and I don’t like DeLay.
docG
Please teach us, John. So how does a Republican in 2005 behave? I promise to believe you and not my lying eyes.
Stormy70
Don’t let Louisiana’s Dem pols feel left out!
DougJ
I think it’s fair to say this: the Democrats have an incredible record of corruption on the local level. Their record in Chicago and New York for corruption was one we didn’t think we’d see broken in our lifetimes. Mayor Daley was the Babe Ruth of corruption. But, maybe just maybe, the Republican House will prove the pundits wrong and be the Mark McGwires of corruption.
rayabacus
Steve,
I don’t know his background, perhaps he is an atty and is voicing an opinion. This opinion is from a DOJ official.
Steve
She doesn’t mention one word about TRMPAC. Funny, that. It’s almost as if she is writing her own theory of the case, then explaining why the theory isn’t valid.
The allegation is that DeLay, through TRMPAC and the RNC, laundered corporate money to the campaigns of Republican candidates. Maybe true, maybe false. But all I’m saying is that if any of these people who claim DeLay has an open-and-shut defense are correct, the case will be gone within weeks. The judge evaluates the legal sufficiency of the case long before it goes to trial.
rayabacus
Fair enough. Thanks for your explanation.
Geek, Esq.
Do Republicans out there really think that someone tied joined at the waist with Don Abramoff is of such pristine moral character?
The Hammer has been shelved.
Tim F
DeLay is out, Roy Blunt is in. Two things have become clear:
(1) DeLay is finished for good. Blunt has substantial seniority within the GOP congressional caucus and a substantial patronage operation of his own. If he plays his cards right, and he’s been planning this for years, a weakened and demoralized DeLay won’t have a chance.
(2) Corruption is still okay, it’s only indictments that hurt you.
DougJ
What DeLay did was nothing more than a glorified fraternity prank.
ppGaz
Stormy is a strong, independent thinker. Let’s not criticize her gratuitously, Doug.
Mike
“Stormy70 Says:
You’re right, the list just goes on and on…
Don’t let Louisiana’s Dem pols feel left out!”
I didn’t.
Huey Long is their patron saint.
The point is, it’s amazingly stupid to say Republicans are corrupt and Democrats are not, and also just the opposite. Scumbags can be of any political affiliation.
Stormy70
Sorry, didn’t get it from Red State. Poor pp, my little comment stalker. I live in Texas where this thing against Kay went down. I remember him being hammered by the local (lib) papers for his bogus indictments, but did not follow it too closely since it was boring. Ronnie Earle has some issues.
Steve S
Steve raises a good point. How many of the Contract with America provisions have Republicans upheld?
To my knowledge… none. When Gingrich was questioned on it, he equivocated saying only that they promised to talk about them.
Oh, BTW… Trevino is a hack. He admits that Delay is corrupt, and then tries to claim the charges against him have no merit. But we all know that Delay was involved in a conspiracy to control the electoral process in Texas… The man has so much admitted to it.
Steve S
That wouldn’t by chance be an appointed DOJ official who is beholden to the Republcan party which appointed them, now would it?
ppGaz
Sure.
Right now it’s Tom DeLay that has some issues: He’s fucked.
If a Republican said that the sun was coming up tomorrow morning, the smart thing to do would be to hurry down to the store and stock up on flashlight batteries.
Credibility, zero. Better than yours, but still, lousy.
Steve
No, Steve S, it is a former DOJ official. So it’s even more irrelevant than what you think.
Lots of lawyers with lots of fine resumes will make lots of legal arguments on behalf of Tom DeLay. Their resumes are not what will control the outcome.
dano347
Steve Says:
No, Steve S, it is a former DOJ official. So it’s even more irrelevant than what you think.
Lots of lawyers with lots of fine resumes will make lots of legal arguments on behalf of Tom DeLay. Their resumes are not what will control the outcome.
September 29th, 2005 at 1:19 am
This would be the same Barbra Comstock who was head of oppositional research for the first Bush campaign? I don’t think they come more partisan than Ms. Comstock.
dano347
Wouldn’t it be ironic if Bush’s agenda were undone by a “trifecta” of corrupt republican leaders?
Kimmitt
Um. I think a better way of putting this is, “I don’t think they have been behaving like the good people I know who are Republicans.” Because they’ve been behaving like Republican elected officials for as long as I’ve been conscious.
TM Lutas
If there is no trial, if the indictment is thrown out prior to seating the jury, Delay has to come back. If not, it’s open season on all politicians with prosecutors from the opposite party in their district/state. You indict, the guy’s toast, and then your indictment’s thrown out. You’ve managed to do a political hit without cost. Earle’s still getting elected in Texas a decade after getting his head handed to him over his irresponsible indictment of Sen. Hutchinson. The “season of indictments” indeed.
A lot of people are assuming this will go to trial. As far as I can tell, it shouldn’t. Maybe Earle has real evidence that wasn’t presented in the indictment but as it stands now, this is a travesty.
stickler
Yeah. Tell that to the Republicans in the House. I’m sure they’d just gladly turn the clock back and put the Hammer back up on his pedestal. How could that pose any problems for the GOP in the fall of 2006?