Tom Delay,hypocrite with no bounds......

[arsbanned]

Yep, that's the article I was referring to. I simply forgot to link to it! Good job finding it.

 

[Riprorin]

The strategy seems to be keep throwing mud and hope that some of it sticks.

So far the strategy isn't working.

 

[arsbanned]

That's why DeLay and his followers are coordinating attacks on Democrats and the "vast left wing conspiracy media"? Something must be pushing their buttons!

 

[conjur]

DeLay Slams Supreme Court Justice
http://beta.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=st...050419/ap_on_go_co/delay_judges_1House

Majority Leader Tom DeLay intensified his criticism of the federal courts on Tuesday, singling out Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy's work from the bench as "incredibly outrageous" because he has relied on international law and done research on the Internet.

DeLay also said he thought there were a "lot of Republican-appointed judges that are judicial activists."

The No. 2 Republican in the House has openly criticized the federal courts since they refused to order the reinsertion of Terry Schiavo's feeding tube. And he pointed to Kennedy as an example of Republican members of the Supreme Court who were activist and isolated.

"Absolutely. We've got Justice Kennedy writing decisions based upon international law, not the Constitution of the United States? That's just outrageous," DeLay told Fox News Radio. "And not only that, but he said in session that he does his own research on the Internet? That is just incredibly outrageous."

Although Kennedy was appointed to the Supreme Court by President Reagan, a conservative icon, he has aroused conservatives' ire by sometimes agreeing with the court's more liberal members. Nevertheless, it is unusual for a congressional leader to single out a Supreme Court justice for criticism.

Just keep flapping that trap, Tommy Boy. DeLay Inc. is headed for a crash! :laugh:

 

[Riprorin]

DeLay's absolutely right. Basing decisions on internatioanl law is outrageous.

 

[Jhhnn]

Well, Rip, the Constitution doesn't directly address the issue of executing juvenile offenders, which is the source of the reference to international law. Kennedy only cites it to confirm their decision, not as the basis for it. Perhaps that's a little too deep for anybody living in the Fundie Christian Whackjob alternate reality that guys like Delay so often appeal to...

So let's just put it in terms of hypocrisy.

Not old enough to legally have sex in most states.

Not old enough to drink.

Not old enough to enter into a contract.

Not old enough to vote.

Not old enough to drive in some states.

Not old enough to do a lot of things, but old enough to ride the lightning in the pseudo Christian realm of Old Testament Vengeance above all else rationale... or, puttin' a size 3 headset on a size 8 issue... too bad that's become a rather common hat size among the Christian Right...

 

[arsbanned]

Retreating under pressure, Republicans on the House ethics committee said Wednesday they were ready to open an investigation into allegations of wrongdoing against Majority Leader Tom DeLay.

Four of the five Republicans on the committee were ready to move ahead, said Rep. Doc Hastings, the panel's Republican chairman.


"Let me emphasize that this is an unusual and extraordinary step for the committee to take," he said.

He was joined at the news conference by three of the other four Republicans on the panel, Reps. Judy Biggert of Illinois, Melissa Hart of Pennsylvania and Tom Cole of Oklahoma. Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas did not attend.

DeLay and other Republicans have insisted in public comments in recent weeks that the charges against him were partisan in nature, the efforts of a minority desperate to regain power.

So 4 of the Republicans on the ethics commitee are now part of the vast left-wing conspiracy. Cool! :thumbsup:

 

[conjur]

House ethics panel prepared to begin DeLay investigation
Republicans on committee agree to probe of beleaguered House leader
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7575370

WASHINGTON - Retreating under pressure, Republicans on the House ethics committee said Wednesday they were ready to open an investigation into allegations of wrongdoing against Majority Leader Tom DeLay.

Four of the five Republicans on the committee were ready to move ahead, said Rep. Doc Hastings, the panel?s Republican chairman. The panel also has five Democratic members.

The Republicans were ?prepared to vote at the earliest opportunity to empanel an investigations subcommittee to review various allegations concerning travel and other actions? by DeLay, he said.

The ethics committee has authority to start an investigation based on information it receives ?through public and other sources,? Hastings said.

Hastings made his announcement in hopes of breaking a deadlock that has prevented the ethics panel from getting down to business for the year.

From that same article:

AP: DeLay used lobbyist?s concert skybox
More recently, an Associated Press investigation found that DeLay treated his political donors to a bird?s-eye view of a Three Tenors concert from an arena skybox leased by a lobbyist now under criminal investigation.

DeLay?s political action committee did not reimburse lobbyist Jack Abramoff for the May 2000 use of the skybox, instead treating it as a type of donation that didn?t have to be disclosed to election regulators at the time.

Dan Allen, a DeLay spokesman, said the May 7, 2000, skybox event rewarded donors to the state arm of DeLay?s Americans for a Republican Majority political committee with a special view of a performance in Washington by opera stars José Carreras, Plácido Domingo, and Luciano Pavarotti.

Allen said DeLay?s office couldn?t find records of who attended the event five years ago. He said Wednesday that DeLay attended.

 

[conjur]

The Smoking Gun???


DeLay Trip Was Charged To Lobbyist's Credit Card
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A12416-2005Apr23.html

A plane trip to London and Scotland in 2000 by then-House Majority Whip Tom DeLay (R-Tex.) was charged to an American Express card issued to Jack Abramoff, a Washington lobbyist at the center of a federal criminal and tax probe, according to two sources who know Abramoff's credit card account number and to a copy of a travel invoice displaying that number.

DeLay's expenses during the same trip for food, phone calls, and other items at a golf course hotel in Scotland were billed to a different credit card also used on the trip by a second registered Washington lobbyist, Edwin A. Buckham, according to receipts documenting that portion of the trip.

House ethics rules bar lawmakers from accepting travel and related expenses from registered lobbyists. DeLay, who is now House Majority Leader, has said that his expenses on this trip were paid by a nonprofit organization, and that the financial arrangements for it were proper. He has also said he had no way of knowing that any lobbyist might have financially supported the trip, either directly or through reimbursements to the nonprofit organization.

The documents obtained by The Washington Post, including receipts for his hotel stays in Scotland and London and billings for his golfing during the trip at the famed St. Andrews course in Scotland, substantiate for the first time that some of DeLay's expenses on the trip were billed to charge cards used by the two lobbyists. The invoice for DeLay's plane fare lists the name of what was then Abramoff's lobbying firm, Preston Gates & Ellis.

Multiple sources, including DeLay's then-chief of staff Susan Hirschmann, have confirmed that DeLay's congressional office was in direct contact with Preston Gates about the trip itinerary before DeLay's departure, to work out details of his travel. These contacts raise questions about DeLay's statement that he had no way of knowing about the financial and logistical support provided by Abramoff and his firm.

Yesterday, DeLay's lawyer, Bobby R. Burchfield, said that DeLay's staff was aware that Preston Gates was trying to arrange meetings and hotels for the trip but that DeLay was unaware of the "logistics" of bill payments, and said DeLay "continues to understand his expenses" were properly paid by the nonprofit organization, the National Center for Public Policy Research.

In 2000, Abramoff was a board member of the group. In a telephone interview yesterday, Hirschmann said the contacts between DeLay's office and persons at Preston Gates occurred because Abramoff "was a board member of the sponsoring organization." Hirschmann added: "We were assured that the National Center paid for the trip."

House rules do not exempt such nonprofit organization board members from the prohibition on lobbyist payments for travel. They also state that this prohibition "applies even where the lobbyist . . . will later be reimbursed for those expenses by a non-lobbyist client."

Burchfield did not dispute that Abramoff used his credit card to pay for DeLay's plane fare, but said in a prepared statement that "the Majority Leader has always believed and continues to believe that all appropriate expenses for the UK trip were paid by the National Center for Public Policy Research." He said that "to the extent that Mr. Abramoff put the charges on his personal credit card, Mr. DeLay has no knowledge of this. But that would be consistent with Mr. Abramoff obtaining full reimbursement from the National Center."

He said further that, in his view, Abramoff's participation on this trip as a board member meant he was permitted to pay for some of the expenses, subject to reimbursement, and that numerous court decisions recognize that different rules may be applicable to the same person acting in different capacities.

Andrew Blum, a publicist for Abramoff's lawyer and spokesman for Abramoff, did not respond to questions relating to the use of Abramoff's credit card for DeLay's plane fare. But he said in a prepared statement yesterday that it was the National Center that "sponsored" the trip, "not Jack Abramoff."

Blum said DeLay was "one of the center's honored guests on this trip" and said Abramoff "is being singled out for doing what is commonly done by lobbyists -- taking trips with members of Congress and their staff so that they can learn about issues that impact the Congress and government policy." The Center's ability to sponsor "this type of educational trip, using contributor funds, is both legal and proper," Blum said.

DeLay was admonished three times last year by the House ethics committee for infringing rules governing lawmakers' activities and their contacts with registered lobbyists. House ethics rules bar the payment by lobbyists for any lawmaker's travel-connected entertainment and recreational activities costing more than $50; they also require that lawmakers accurately report the sponsor of their trips and the full cost.

In an article last month about the same trip by DeLay, The Washington Post disclosed that an Indian tribe and a gambling services company made donations to the National Center for Public Policy Research that covered most of the expenses declared by participants at that time. The article also said these payments were made two months before DeLay voted against legislation opposed by the tribe and the company. DeLay has said the vote was unrelated to the payments.

The article also reported that Abramoff submitted an expense voucher to Preston Gates seeking a reimbursement of $12,789.73 to cover expenses for meals, hotels and transportation during the London and Scotland trip incurred by DeLay; his wife, Christine; and his two aides.

The new receipts obtained by The Post add more detail about these expenses, make clear that the total expenses for all of the participants were at least $50,000 more than was previously known, and connect Abramoff directly to the payment of some charges.

For DeLay, the trip began on May 25 with a flight to London from Dulles airport and ended on June 3 with a return trip from Europe via Newark and ending in Houston. In between, his itinerary called for stops in Edinburgh, Glasgow, and St. Andrews, in Scotland. DeLay said the purpose of the trip was to hold meetings with "Conservative leaders" in Britain and Scotland, including Margaret Thatcher. The former prime minister's office has confirmed such a meeting occurred.

DeLay's two aides, Tony Rudy and Susan Hirschmann, had an overlapping itinerary; Rudy was present from May 29 to June 3, and Hirschmann was present from May 22 to June 2. The spouses of Rudy and Buckham also were present.

The travel receipts obtained by The Post do not make clear how the expenses for the entire trip -- which involved at least 10 people and which two sources said exceeded $120,000 -- were paid. One source familiar with the billings said yesterday that the National Center reimbursed Abramoff for the charges incurred by DeLay and his staff that were billed to Abramoff's credit card; but the receipt themselves do not indicate whether some of the charges incurred by Abramoff were ultimately reimbursed and, if so, by whom.

The receipts make clear that DeLay's flights were initially billed to Abramoff, as were his wife's. The plane ticket for the husband of one of DeLay's aides -- David Hirschmann -- was billed to the same American Express card used for DeLay's ticket, according to a copy of the invoice.

Although Amy Ridenour, director of the National Center for Public Policy Research, has said she organized the trip, two other sources said that DeLay's round-trip business-class tickets on Continental Airlines and British Airways were booked by Preston Gates employees.

The itinerary and invoice for DeLay's trip, prepared by a travel service in Seattle, Wash., was sent by the service to Preston Gates on May 23, 2000, according to a copy of the invoice. That was two days before DeLay's departure. The invoice states DeLay's business-class tickets on Continental Airlines and British Airways alone cost a total of $6,938.70.

The records also indicate the expenses associated with DeLay exceeded those that he declared in a signed statement to the House clerk on June 30, 2000. That form listed the purpose of the trip as "educational" and gave a tally of $28,106 in expenses for DeLay and his wife, or an average of $2,800 a day; it stated that all of these charges were paid by the National Center for Public Policy Research, which provided the data to DeLay.

Receipts from the golfing portion of the trip show that DeLay accumulated his own share of these charges, which according to fees set by the tour arranger amounted to nearly $5,000 for each golfer and totaled in the tens of thousands of dollars for the entire group. Fees associated with playing golf are not listed on DeLay's travel disclosure form. Burchfield, DeLay's lawyer, said DeLay "personally paid for two rounds of golf and understands that the other two rounds of golf he played were included in his hotel package" and reimbursed by the National Center.

A copy of the $81 bill for the DeLays' expenses during the trip at a separate hotel in St. Andrews -- the Old Course Hotel Golf Resort & Spa -- states that those charges were paid by the same American Express credit card used on the trip by Buckham, the lobbyist, to pay for his own hotel room at the Glasgow Hilton. Buckham could not be reached by phone at home or his office and did not respond to an e-mailed request for comment. Burchfield said he cannot explain how this happened and did not know who owned this credit card; he also said DeLay was unaware of this fact.

Buckham, a former chief of staff to DeLay, was at the time a registered lobbyist for AT&T, Enron Corp., and the Nuclear Energy Institute. DeLay's wife was employed, at the time of the trip, by Buckham's lobbying firm, the Alexander Strategy Group, and was receiving a salary from it, according to DeLay's personal financial disclosure statement for that year, on file with the House clerk.

Abramoff, at the time of the trip, represented eLottery, Inc. , a gambling services company that opposed the Internet gambling bill pending before the House. Preston Gates registered as a lobbyist for eLottery on June 2, 2000, one day before the trip ended; later in the year, Abramoff registered as a lobbyist for other clients who opposed the bill, including several Indian tribes. The federal probe is looking into his handling of his tribal clients and the large fees he was paid.

Hirschmann and her husband ultimately accumulated charges of 2,073 British pounds, or roughly $1,368 at the prevailing exchange rate for four nights in their "superior" room at the London Four Seasons Hotel. Those charges included $57 at the hotel lounge, $33 from the room bar, $15 from the gift shop, and $186 for chauffeured cars, according to a copy of their hotel bill. Hirschmann said one car was used to reach the meeting with Thatcher.

At least one of the Hirschmanns also played golf at St. Andrews. Susan Hirschmann is now a lobbyist at the Washington firm of Williams & Jensen; the firm's Web site contains a published claim that DeLay and other House Republican leaders meet with her frequently. As a staff member at the time of the trip, she would have been covered by the same ethics rules that apply to DeLay and other House members.

DeLay and his wife, for their part, stayed for four nights in a "conservatory" room at the same hotel in London as Hirschmann, accumulating charges of roughly $348 a night for rooms that included a glass-enclosed porch overlooking London's Park Lane, according to a copy of the bill for their stay and the Web site of the hotel.

They also ran up hotel charges of $64 for room service; $6 for a valet pressing; and $133 for a private car from Heathrow airport, the bill states. Their room bill also lists a charge of $191 for six theatre tickets, but Burchfield said the DeLays do not recall attending any plays in London. He said if the hotel charges were being "picked up" by a representative of the National Center, "they would not necessarily have seen the hotel bill."

DeLay, Burchfield said, "does not know how the logistics . . . [of the bill payments for the trip] were being effectuated."

House ethics rules contain detailed provisions barring the acceptance of any travel funds from private sources if doing so would "create the appearance of using public office for private gain." They also obligate lawmakers to "make inquiry on the source of the funds that will be used to pay" for any travel ostensibly financed by a nonprofit organization -- to rule out the acceptance of reimbursements that come from one organization when a trip is "in fact organized and conducted by someone else."

Trips outside the United States are also not supposed to exceed a week in length out of concern, the rules state, for "the public perception that such trips often may amount to paid vacations for the Member and his family at the expense of special interest groups."

But, the GOP has kicked off members from the ethics committee and filled it with pro-DeLay people. Until the GOP plays fair and starts a REAL investigation, they are obstructing justice and, imo, members involved should be brought up for impeachment.

 

[conjur]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=s...e=1&u=/nm/20050425/pl_nm/bush_delay_dc

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - In a show of support, President Bush will give embattled House of Representatives Republican leader Tom DeLay an Air Force One ride to Washington from Texas on Tuesday, a White House spokesman said.

DeLay is under fire over allegations that he violated ethics rules by allowing lobbyists to pay for some of his overseas travel, including a May 2000 trip to Britain that included golf at the St. Andrews golf course in Scotland.

The Texas Republican has accused Democrats and the media of conducting a witch hunt, and the White House has called him a friend of Bush and said Bush appreciates the work he is doing as the No. 2 Republican in the House.

DeLay is to attend with Bush an event in Galveston, Texas, on Tuesday about the president's proposals to overhaul Social Security and then will ride back to Washington with him aboard Air Force One, the spokesman said on Monday.

I wonder if he'll hold *his* hand, too? Doubt it. I don't DeLay is above a "4"

Wonder which of the Daily Show's "Level of Friendship" this qualifies for?

http://www.flickr.com/photos/dotsara/10218413/

1. Friends with Benefits
2. B.F.F.
3. Social Friends
4. Guy I Swordfight with in the Bathroom
5. Talk to the Hand
6. Mortal Enemy

 

[conjur]

DeLay Woes Prompt Rush to Refile Forms
Lawmakers Fear Ripples Over Ethics
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co...rticle/2005/04/25/AR2005042501414.html

Members of Congress are rushing to amend their travel and campaign records, fearing that the controversy over House Majority Leader Tom DeLay will trigger an ethics war that will bring greater scrutiny to their own travel and official activities.

Some offices have sharply limited staff travel, and some members are not traveling at all because of the intense review they believe they will face in coming months.

Lawmakers are paying old restaurant bills, filing missing forms and correcting erroneous ones as journalists and political opponents comb through records and DeLay (R-Tex.) attempts to answer questions about travel financing and his past relationships with lobbyists.

[...]

Jan W. Baran, a Republican lobbying and campaign finance expert at Wiley, Rein & Fielding, says that in reaction to DeLay's woes, none of his clients who are members of Congress are traveling at the expense of private interests these days.

"My overall impression about members is that they're not taking any trips for the time being," he said. Baran said he also has been e-mailing handouts to clients who want to be reminded of the rules.

Kenneth A. Gross of Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom said he is "getting more calls asking what is the letter of the law."

"There will be fewer sponsored trips," he predicted. "There's going to be more of a reluctance to fund some of these trips, and those that happen will be less extravagant."

Well, GOOD!!

About time our politicians stopped being wined and dined by special interests and actually <gasp> paid attention to their constituents!

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

The noose is tightening around this bastards neck. I hope he swings good and long from it.
(by this, I mean I hope he gets jail time, loses his seat, and brings to light all the others who are guilty, both dems and repubs and whomever else)

 

[conjur]

Records Show DeLay, Lobbyist Daily Contact
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=s...ap/20050426/ap_on_go_co/delay_lobbyist

WASHINGTON - Tom DeLay and his top aides were often in daily contact with lobbyist Jack Abramoff during the mid-1990s as the lobbyist made campaign contributions and arranged travel for the House leader while seeking legislative help for a multimillion-dollar client, according to law firm records made public for the first time.

DeLay's office kept Abramoff, now under criminal investigation, routinely apprised of congressional efforts to block new regulations on his client, the Northern Mariana Islands.

Abramoff's firm reported it drafted legislative materials for DeLay, and Abramoff boasted to island leaders he could use his close ties to Republican leaders to block legislation from receiving a House vote.

"Getting the bill off the schedule for next week, however, should enable us to use our connections within the Leadership to ensure that ... it will not come to the floor," Abramoff wrote the islands in September 1996.

It's all about the cover-up.


Oh, this, too:

Gifts in High Places
Did DeLay staffers violate ethics rules?
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1054596,00.html

Lobbyist Jack Abramoff gave expensive gifts to key members of then-House Majority Whip Tom DeLay's staff, which the aides accepted in apparent violation of House ethics rules, according to two sources who worked at Abramoff's law firm at the time Abramoff made the gifts. The gifts included high-end golf equipment, tickets to sporting events and concerts and, in the case of one high-ranking DeLay staff member, a weekend getaway paid for by Abramoff's own frequent flyer and hotel points, two sources who had direct knowledge of the transactions tell TIME.

The two sources say that one recipient of the gifts, including the weekend trip and expensive golf clubs, was Tony C. Rudy, who worked for DeLay for five years and served at various times as DeLay's press secretary, policy director, general counsel and deputy chief of staff when DeLay was House Majority Whip. When Rudy left DeLay's office in 2002, he joined Abramoff at Greenberg Traurig, the firm that hired Abramoff in December 2000. Rudy now works at Alexander Strategy Group, a lobbying firm headed by former DeLay Chief of Staff Ed Buckham.

A spokesman for Abramoff said he is unavailable for comment. Rudy has not returned repeated calls requesting comment.

DeLay's current chief of staff, Tim Berry, told TIME that he recalls Abramoff giving him a golf club while they were playing golf in the late 1990s, or possibly as late as 2000, when Berry was a floor assistant to DeLay. Berry said he found the situation awkward, and "got rid of it" a few days later, and added that in the current environment, he now wishes he had simply given back the gift to Abramoff. Berry could not recall the make of the club, which he believes was a wood, and said he does not know whether its value would have exceeded the gift limit under the House rules.

Rudy was one of two staff members who joined DeLay on a trip to Scotland and England in 2000?a trip in which the airfare was paid for by Abramoff's credit card, the Washington Post revealed earlier this week. House rules prohibit lobbyists from paying for the travel of members and their staffs, even if they are subsequently reimbursed by others. DeLay's office maintains that he believed and continues to believe that the trip was sponsored and paid for by a non-profit public policy institute, the National Center for Public Policy Research, which would have been allowable under House rules. At the time, Abramoff served on the NCPPR board.

Under House ethics rules, no member or employee of the House may accept a gift valued at more than $50, or a series of gifts worth more than $100 over the course of a year. The rules stipulate that gifts covered under the limit include "services, training, transportation, lodging and meals, whether provided in kind, by purchase of a ticket, payment in advance or reimbursement after the expense has been incurred."

Republicans tightened the rules considerably after they took control of the House in 1995, having been elected in part on their promise to clean up the chamber's ethical standards. The previous rule allowed members and their staff to accept gifts from a single source up to a cumulative value of $250 over the course of a year.

The revelation comes at a time when the House ethics committee, which would normally be the body that would investigate such matters, has ceased to function. Democrats on the committee object to rules changes that they say were designed to protect DeLay by making it more difficult to launch an investigation. The new rules would require a majority vote?which means support from at least one Republican on the panel?for the committee to begin a probe.

 

[conjur]

Ethics Chief Says GOP Must Change Rules
http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,1280,-4964958,00.html

WASHINGTON - The chairman of the House ethics committee has conceded that his Republicans colleagues must reverse partisan changes to investigative rules if they hope to break a deadlock that has virtually shut the panel down, a senior GOP aide said Tuesday.

The conclusion reached by Rep. Doc Hastings, R-Wash., may be unpopular with Republicans who muscled the changes through the House in January. Since then, GOP lawmakers have had to defend their votes against accusations by Democrats - and media editorials - that the changes were designed to protect Majority Leader Tom DeLay from further investigation.

Damn liberals...always harping on poor little Tommyboy.

 

[CaptnKirk]

And why has the 'Ethics' comittee been so reluctant to deal with deLay ?

Can you say 'On the Take' or 'Unindicted Co-conspirators'

Anyone understand the ramafications of bribes and extortion ?

Or maybe he just runs a money laundering service for the Republican Money Machine.

<CLIP>

All five Republicans on the House ethics committee have financial links to Tom DeLay that could raise conflict-of-interest issues should the panel investigate the GOP majority leader.
Public records show DeLay's leadership political action committee (PAC) gave $15,000 to the campaign of Rep. Melissa Hart, R-Pa. ? $10,000 in 2000 and $5,000 in 2002. Hart would chair a panel to investigate DeLay if the committee moves forward with a probe.

The same political committee, Americans for a Republican Majority, also has donated to the campaigns of ethics Chairman Doc Hastings of Washington, Judy Biggert of Illinois and Tom Cole of Oklahoma. They are among scores of Republicans DeLay has contributed to. Cole and the remaining committee Republican, Lamar Smith of Texas, contributed to DeLay's legal defense fund.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[conjur]

GOP to Reverse Ethics Rule Blocking New DeLay Probe
January Change Led Democrats to Shut Down Panel
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co...rticle/2005/04/26/AR2005042601295.html

House Republican leaders, acknowledging that ethics disputes are taking a heavy toll on the party's image, decided yesterday to rescind a controversial rule change that led to the three-month shutdown of the ethics committee, according to officials who participated in the talks.

Republicans touched off a political uproar in January by changing a rule that had required the ethics committee to continue considering a complaint against a House member if there was a deadlock between the committee's five Republicans and five Democrats. The January change reversed this, calling for automatic dismissal of an ethics complaint when a deadlock occurs.

Democrats rebelled against that and other changes -- saying Republicans were trying to protect House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Tex.) from further ethics investigations -- and blocked the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, as the ethics panel is officially known, from organizing for the new Congress.

Republicans on the committee say they will launch an investigation of DeLay's handling of overseas trips and gifts as soon as the impasse over the rules is broken. The Washington Post reported last weekend that Washington lobbyist Jack Abramoff charged DeLay's airfare to London and Scotland to his American Express card in 2000.

[...]

The officials participating in talks about restarting the committee said Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) has agreed to ask the House to vote later this week on a rollback of the rule change. A Republican adviser said the decision "is the speaker's way of trying to put this behind us and get us back to regular order."

"There will be a [political] cost to this, but if he had not done this, the cost would continue to increase," said the adviser, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because Hastert had not announced his decision.

This morning, at a weekly meeting for all House Republicans, Hastert will present options for the rollback package, officials said. The officials, who demanded anonymity because the negotiations were confidential, said the proposal will include a reversal of the January rule that would automatically dismiss an ethics complaint after 45 days if the committee is deadlocked.

"It's gone," an official said of the automatic-dismissal rule as he emerged from the negotiations.

A House Republican leadership aide said that the automatic-dismissal rule is "the rule that is most commonly believed to be designed to protect Tom DeLay" and that it was "impossible to win the communications battle" on it.

Reid played this very smartly. He backed the GOP into a corner with his offer of compromise and now it's time to set the rules back to where they were before the GOP decided to protect Bugman.

 

[arsbanned]

I respect this Reid fellow. He seems to be very competent. I'm also very relieved that the rules have been re-instated. Nobody should be so far above the law they can simply change the rules to suit their behavior. That goes for Democrats and Republicans.

 

[conjur]

GOP Talking Points re: going back to the old rules

http://rawstory.com/exclusives/byrne/gop_talking_points_ethics_427.htm


Pretty damn pathetic. The rules they used against the Democrats in the 90s just weren't good enough to protect their own under the Propagandist so they changed them. Now, they're feeling the hypocritical heat and are reverting to the old rules.

 

[CaptnKirk]

<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/04/27/AR2005042702053.html">After being rebuked three times before, how can 'Stupidity' be used as a defense
for being an arrogant, manipulative, cheating extortionist ?</a>

<CLIP>

Now that it's clear that his controversial private-paid trips abroad will be put under a microscope in Congress, Tom DeLay is in serious danger of being declared in violation of House ethics rules, legal experts say.

Lawyers who specialize in ethics cases believe that the Republican House majority leader from Texas might be in technical breach of at least a few congressional regulations. According to published reports, a registered foreign agent paid for one of DeLay's overseas trips and a registered lobbyist used his credit card to pay for another foreign airfare -- actions the rules prohibit. DeLay may also have accepted gifts that exceeded congressional limits, taken an expense-paid trip overseas for longer than the rules allow and not disclosed all of the benefits he received.

"It appears from news reports that there were aspects of his trips that did not comply with the ethics rules," said Jan W. Baran, a lawyer and ethics expert.

These experts say the best chance for DeLay to be vindicated -- or to get little more than a slap on the wrist in an ethics inquiry -- is if he's able to convince a congressional committee that he was unaware of what the lobbyists did.

"The rules are written in a way that indicate that if a member of Congress is misled about who's paying for things, that is a credible defense," said Kenneth A. Gross, a lawyer who deals with congressional ethics. The House will have to wrestle with whether DeLay, the chamber's second-ranking Republican, knew or should have known that he might be violating House rules.

History shows, however, that once an ethics investigation is started against congressional leaders such as DeLay, they usually don't get away unscathed. The ethics committee already admonished DeLay three times last year for a variety of lapses. The panel can also look into other issues that come up during its investigation.

Leaders "generally get nicked a little bit," said Baran, who represents Republicans.

This time DeLay could be admonished, censured or, at worst, expelled by a House vote -- if the chamber takes any action at all. Initially, DeLay's fate will be in the hands of the soon-to-be-empaneled 10-member ethics committee, which is divided equally between Republicans and Democrats. The panel has been in limbo for the past four months because of a partisan feud over rules changes Republicans imposed in January. Yesterday, House Republicans agreed to rescind those rules changes to try to end the stalemate.

The allegations against DeLay that have been published in recent weeks are a blur of charge and countercharge. Two things are clear. First, the most serious allegations generally involve overseas trips that were organized by nongovernment groups. Second, unless a link is established between the journeys and his official actions, it doesn't appear that DeLay will face any civil or criminal worries. For now, the issues involve House ethics rules, which are overseen by the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, also known as the ethics committee.

The panel hasn't formally agreed to address the DeLay accusations. If it does, a subcommittee of four lawmakers would conduct a confidential inquiry, which could take six months to a year. It would collect documents and take testimony about DeLay's trips.

"The process can be a penalty in itself," Gross warned. "It is inherently partisan and political."

The trip that was most rife with potential problems for DeLay occurred in late May and early June of 2000. According to a report Sunday in The Washington Post, DeLay's airfare was charged to an American Express credit card issued to Jack Abramoff, a registered Washington lobbyist who is under investigation by federal authorities and a Senate committee in connection with tens of millions of dollars he collected for pubic affairs work for Indian tribes. Lobbyists are barred from paying for lawmakers' travel, even if the expenses are reimbursed by an authorized source, as Abramoff's spokesman says they were in this case, experts said.

</ and more . . .>

 

[conjur]

Because he's God. The Right can do no wrong. It's all the liberals' fault. Clinton made him do it.


BTW, heard today on CNN:

"You guys better get out of my way. Where's my security?"-remarks on CNN by Tom DeLay to a gaggle of reporters.

 

[conjur]

Survey: DeLay's District Disapproves Of His Job Performance
DeLay Did Not Comment On Local 2 Survey Results
http://www.click2houston.com/politics/4441145/detail.html

HOUSTON -- The majority of voters in House Majority Leader Tom DeLay's district do not approve of his job performance, according to an exclusive Local 2 poll released Monday.

SurveyUSA asked 548 registered voters in the 22nd congressional district several questions about the embattled republican's performance.

In general, do you approve or disapprove of the job Tom DeLay is doing as Congressman?
51 percent disapproved
42 percent approved
7 percent were not sure

What letter grade would you give Tom DeLay for his job as congressman? An A, B, C, D, or an F?
A: 23 percent
B: 19 percent
C: 18 percent
D: 16 percent
F: 22 percent
Not Sure: 1 percent

Based on what you know right now, do you think Tom DeLay should remain in his position as House Majority Leader, he should resign as House Majority Leader but remain a member of Congress, or do you think he should completely resign from Congress?
39 percent: Remain House Majority Leader
21 percent: Resign Leadership
36 percent: Resign From Congress
4 percent: Not Sure

The poll had a margin of error of 4.3 percent

Losing support at home does not bode well for the Bugman. And, the tribute to him is another sign he's on the way out.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: conjur
Survey: DeLay's District Disapproves Of His Job Performance

"The people of his district know that Congressman DeLay is guided by principles, not by polls.

He keeps getting re-elected election after election because of the positive work he's doing on the issues that matter most to the families in his district like growing the economy, fully funding our space program, fighting for tax relief, and improving mobility."

At least they said it's all about the money.

 

[conjur]

Three companies no longer contributing to DeLay legal fund
http://www.mysanantonio.com/sharedcontent/APStories/stories/D89SL7I80.html

Three major companies say they no longer make contributions to a legal fund for Majority Leader Tom DeLay, who has been bombarded for months with allegations of ethical misconduct.

The companies had contributed $15,000 to the Texas Republican since 2000. The companies are American Airlines, Verizon and Nissan North America Inc.

"American Airlines does not intend to make any future contributions to Representative DeLay's legal defense fund," the Fort Worth, Texas-based airline said in a statement. "The $5,000 contribution, made three years ago, was done by an individual who is no longer part of American Airlines."

Verizon, which donated $5,000 in 2001, said it has had a policy since that year against contribution to legal defense funds. Nissan North America gave $5,000 in July 2001, but said it has not made any additional contributions and won't make any more. "We do not plan to seek a refund," company spokesman Fred Standish said in a statement.

The companies issued the statements this week to American Progress Action Fund, a project of the Center for American Progress, a liberal Washington think tank. American Progress launched a campaign April 6 to stop the contributions from the companies and two others, Bacardi U.S.A. Inc. and RJ Reynolds Tobacco Co.

Poor Tommy Boy.



Two on ethics panel won't probe DeLay (Smith-TX and Cole-OK)
http://www.kentucky.com/mld/kentucky/news/special_packages/iraq/11563740.htm

Two Republicans on the House ethics committee will not participate in any investigation of Majority Leader Tom DeLay because they contributed to DeLay's legal defense funds, the committee's chairman said Wednesday.

Rep. Doc Hastings said the committee members - Reps. Lamar Smith of Texas and Tom Cole of Oklahoma - agreed that the past contributions "raised doubts - however unwarranted - about whether those members would be able to judge fairly allegations of impropriety against Mr. DeLay."

The withdrawal of Smith and Cole from the case would lead Hastings to ask House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., to designate two House members to fill in temporarily in any investigation of DeLay. The House will have a 20-member pool, 10 members from each party, to allow the speaker to chose temporary committee members.

Wonder if there are any that *didn't* contribute?

 

[nageov3t]

so we're getting our ethics panel back?

sweet.

hopefully they'll start investigating all of the politicians implicated, regardless of which side of the aisle they sit on.

 

[arsbanned]

The thing is, we need him to stay, since he personifies everything we need to change in Washington. He'll help the Dems tremendously in the midterm elections by staying.