DeLay Will Plead Guilty
You heard it here first: Tom DeLay will plead guilty to one count of criminal conspiracy in Texas.
The House Speaker was indicted by a Texas grand jury today. He is charged with conspiracy to violate campaing financing laws. Two political associates of DeLay's were also indicted.
A spokesman for DeLay was quick to blame partisan politics for DeLay's newfound status as defendant. "They could not get Tom DeLay at the polls. They could not get Mr. DeLay on the House floor. Now they're trying to get him into the courtroom," huffed Kevin Madden, a DeLay mouth-for hire.
Let's be real. Only Tom got Tom. He is no victim of a conspiracy. He is accused of taking corporate cash, laundering it through the Republican National Committee, and then having it distributed to Texas Republicans in violation of Texas law. Sooooooee, said Tommy.
So why am I so sure he'll plead? A line in the indictment notes that his lawyer waived the statute of limitations on the conspiracy charge during grand jury proceedings. Why would a competent lawyer waive a complete defense? Because worse was on the way if he did not.
Initiates know the practice as charge-bargaining. You see a funnel cloud barreling at you and you ask your local prosecutor, quietly, "on what charges are you willing to take my client if he pleads?" I suspect DeLay will enter a plea late in the year.
DeLay gets time to step aside. House Republicans get a chance to regroup and spin the cancer out of their midst.
I wonder if Karl Rove will offer Delay a job supervising intelligence operations. A hatchet like Tom's is hard to find.
I hear there's an opening at FEMA. No experience required.
Posted by: Windypundit | September 28, 2005 at 02:35 PM
How do I love thee. You made my date with this faboo post. Oh to dream the impossible dream that Tommy might be purged.
Posted by: Mieke | September 28, 2005 at 04:20 PM
His lawyer may have had that in mind, but as we all know, clients do not always adhere to our wise counsel.
I mean, did you hear DeLay blasting the indictment as "one of those most baseless in the history of America"? WTF?
Posted by: mythago | September 29, 2005 at 09:55 PM
A criminal defense attorney colleague of mine comments: "It's not uncommon for a defense lawyer to waive the S/L in order to gain more time to try to convince the prosecutor not to file charges. I think that's all that happened here."
Posted by: Daniel M. Kowalski | September 30, 2005 at 11:41 AM