Tom DeLay

Breaking: DeLay's Goons Assault 70-Year-Old Woman

Bob Fertik — Thu, 06 Apr 2006 17:55:02 -0400

I demand CNN provide wall-to-wall coverage of this breaking political assault scandal at a rally for Ned Lampson, the Democrat running for Tom DeLay's seat. CrooksandLiars has the video of the tall white-haired man in the DeLay t-shirt assaulting the short woman in front of him - Marsha Rovai, age 70.

This is a statement from Marsha Rovai:

"I can't believe my Congressman, Tom DeLay, would organize this type of assault. I was assaulted by two different people. One of the men hit me and another shoved his sign into my face, and then when I pushed his sign away he violently pulled my hat down over my eyes and pushed me. I’m considering filing an assault charge. This is just very upsetting and I’m so disappointed in Tom Delay for organizing this attack."

The violent attack on Lampson's rally was organized by DeLay's campaign manager Chris Homan. Juanita has been blogging all the details. Here's the email he sent yesterday:

We would meet tomorrow morning at 9:45 am on the first floor of the parking garage attached to the Marriott. Please get folks to call our campaign office 281.343.1333 and let us know they can do it – or e-mail Leonard Cash (in the cc field above) so that we can get some head count. Let’s give Lampson a parting shot that wrecks his press conference.

Lest you think DeLay staffers would never organize a riot, remember this photo of the Republican riot that shut down the Miami-Dade recount in 2000, featuring DeLay staffer Tom Pyle in the very front (#1):

The Cut and Run Republican

Bob Geiger — Thu, 06 Apr 2006 09:10:54 -0400

And here’s Evan Derkacz at Alternet with an outstanding piece on the resignation of Congressman Tom DeLay, in the wake of formal criminal charges of money laundering, and the extent to which it is also a symptom of a corruption gene throughout the Republican party.

An Excerpt:

DeLay will undoubtedly maintain that his four letters of admonition, his criminal indictments, the numerous anecdotes of threats and coercion, are merely partisan contrivances, as he has done in the past.

But the point here isn't simply that a man who consciously took it upon himself to undermine the American system of Democracy is facing charges for his strong-arming opponents and ethics breaches of breathtaking proportions. The point is that nearly every powerful player in the conservative movement and the Republican Party "fed from his trough."

It’s a great read and you can see the rest here.

You can reach Bob Geiger at geiger.bob@gmail.com

Jack Cafferty Smacks DeLay One More time

Bob Geiger — Tue, 04 Apr 2006 18:11:41 -0400

Everyone's favorite cable-news curmudgeon, Jack Cafferty, who has never suffered easily with the GOP band of thieves on Capitol Hill, let it rip on Tom DeLay's disgraced departure from Congress.

Said Cafferty of DeLay today on CNN's The Situation Room: "He would strut around on capitol hill like a cocky little, banty rooster, but today he slithered away from Congress to await his fate at the hands of the criminal justice system -- good riddance."

Now, Jack, don't be so hard on him. He's just your average Republican.

As always, you can catch the clip at Crooks and Liars.

You can reach Bob Geiger at geiger.bob@gmail.com

The Fall of DeLay is a Shot of Hope

Ted Kahl — Tue, 04 Apr 2006 16:09:58 -0400

Once upon a time, I never imagined that the "most powerful man in Washington," as he was often called, would resign in disgrace. Remember, it was DeLay who strong-armed the impeachment of Clinton, even after the GOP lost 5 seats. For over seven years I have invested my entire life in opposing the hegemony of the Right Wing. Back in 1999, the Right was poised to control all three branches of government, and I believed that once that happened, there would be no turning back. And then with a little help from Katherine Harris, Jeb's pals, DeLay's Gucci riot squad -- and the Felonious Five on the Supreme Court -- the Right did control all three branches.

But then there was Jefford's courageous move that gave the Senate to the Democrats. That revived my hopes that there could be a check on the Right's power. In the run-up to the 2002 election, I still had the passion -- which I expressed through activism on the internet and in my local area. I so wanted the Dems to strengthen control of the Senate, and regain the House.

Unfortunately, the Dems fumbled that opportunity, right from the point when Jeffords gave them the Senate. Where were the investigations? Why weren't the Dems using the bully pulpit to expose Enron's influence of Bush's energy policy, Bush's failures around 9/11 -- and so much more??? Why were they still rubber stamping damn near everything Bush and the GOP wanted -- all those egregious bills and nominations???

Oh, the Dems wanted to work "in a spirit of bi-partisanship", to "raise the tone in Washington." They were parroting the very phrases that Rove & Co. had crafted to cow the Dems into submission. With the Democrats, it was like -- "oh if we're nice, you won't hurt us will you?" But Bush and the GOP just saw it as weakness, and kept beating the crap out of them. The Dems were suckers and in some cases, maybe worse...

And after the 2002 defeats, there was one discouraging episode after another -- through the 2004 (s)election, and the seemingly daily reports of the Dems caving in -- with the Alito nomination, and most recently on the Patriot Act. But now the mighty DeLay has fallen! Suddenly, I feel some hope that the tide can still be turned against Bush and the Right Wing. What will happen with the Limbaugh case? Will Fitzgerald pursue Libby's co-conspirators? What's more -- DeLay was faced with the very real prospect that he would lose the election. Does that mean that some elections still cannot be rigged, such as in DeLay's district? So it hasn't all been in vain... Jackson Thoreau can certainly attest to that.

In 2003, I organized a petition drive to oust Tom DeLay from office and presented copies of the petition signed by several thousand fellow Americans to the offices of Rep. Joel Hefley, former chairman of the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, and Rep. Alan B. Mollohan, who is still ranking minority member of that committee.

The grounds I used were for misconduct and violation of House rules, especially the first rule of the House Code of Ethics, which states, "A member, officer, or employee of the House of Representatives shall conduct himself at all times in a manner which shall reflect creditably on the House of Representatives."

At the same time, Public Citizen and other groups and individuals contacted the same committee with similar requests. We couldn't file official ethics complaints because House leaders had passed rules years before stopping individual groups and citizens from doing so. Only members of Congress could file a formal complaint, and they rarely did.

So our efforts didn't immediately start an investigation on DeLay, and they were never really acknowledged by the House committee. But I believe they helped lead to an environment in which officials started questioning DeLay's abuses more and gave the committee some support to go after DeLay.

DeLay Throws in the Hammer

Bob Fertik — Mon, 03 Apr 2006 23:13:11 -0400

But he still says he's pure as the driven snow. Hugh Hewitt predicts a speedy comeback - I can't wait!

Rep. DeLay Won't Seek Reelection
By Jonathan Weisman and Chris Cillizza

Rep. Tom DeLay (R-Tex.), a primary architect of the House Republican majority who became one of the most powerful and feared leaders in Washington, told House allies tonight that he will resign from the House rather than face a reelection fight that appears increasingly unwinnable.

The decision came just three days after his former deputy chief of staff, Tony C. Rudy, pleaded guilty to conspiracy and corruption charges, telling federal prosecutors of a criminal enterprise being run out of DeLay's leadership offices. Rudy's plea agreement did not implicate DeLay in any illegal activities, but by placing the influence-buying efforts of disgraced Republican lobbyist Jack Abramoff directly in DeLay's operation, the former aide may have made an already difficult reelection bid all but out of reach.

DeLay, who turns 59 this Saturday, did not say precisely when he would step down, but under Texas law, he must either die, be convicted of a felony, or move out of his district to be removed from the November ballot. DeLay told Time magazine that he is likely to change his official residence to Alexandria, Va., by the end of May. He said he informed President Bush of his decision this afternoon.

"This had become a referendum on me," he told Time in an article posted on the magazine's Web site. "So it's better for me to step aside and let it be a referendum on ideas, Republican values and what's important for this district."

"I'm a realist. I've been around awhile," he added. "I can evaluate political situations." Asked if he had done anything illegal or immoral in public office, DeLay replied: "No."

Former aides and sources close to DeLay said his decision was not motivated by Rudy's guilty plea, but by DeLay's concerns that he might lose his suburban Houston seat to his Democratic opponent, former Rep. Nick Lampson, and his belief that another Republican would win. DeLay's reelection race was expected to be one of the most expensive House campaigns in history and a drain on GOP coffers. Once DeLay steps aside, the Texas Republican Party will choose a replacement candidate.

Senior House Republicans have been saying for several weeks that DeLay would make his decision based on what was best for the Republican Party. Indeed, Democratic House campaign officials have been hoping that in November their candidate would face DeLay, whom they believe could be the weakest Republican candidate they could hope for.

DeLay got a temporary political boost last month when he fended off three challengers to win a Republican primary with 62 percent of the vote. But recent polls showed an uphill climb against Lampson and another former congressman, Steve Stockman, who had cut his ties to the Republican Party to run as an independent. In early January, a Houston Chronicle poll showed DeLay trailing Lampson 30 percent to 22 percent, with Stockman taking 11 percent.

A December poll by CNN, USA Today and Gallup also indicated that a credible Democrat could beat DeLay.

DeLay's decision capped a long, difficult slide from power that began in September, when a Texas grand jury indicted him on money-laundering and illegal campaign finance charges. Under House Republican rules, DeLay had no choice but to relinquish is post as House majority leader, but he vowed to beat the charges and quickly return to power.

In the ensuing months, the separate federal corruption probe stemming from Abramoff's activities drew closer to DeLay, first eliciting a guilty plea from DeLay's former press secretary, Michael Scanlon, then from Abramoff, whom DeLay once described as "one of my closest and dearest friends." Some House Republicans publicly stated DeLay could not be allowed to return to the House leadership if his implication in the Abramoff scandal appeared inevitable.

In January, DeLay bowed to pressure from fellow Republicans and abandoned his quest to regain the majority leader's post. At that time, however, he pledged to seek reelection, and he quickly snared a coveted seat on the House Appropriations Committee.

His renunciation of the leader's post touched off a scramble among Republicans eager to move past the DeLay era. A month later, Rep John Boehner (R-Ohio) upset DeLay's protege, House Majority Whip Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), to win the highest position in the Republican conference, effectively ending the DeLay era of leadership that stretched back to Dec. 6, 1994, and the Republican Revolution.

When Republicans swept to power that year, DeLay capitalized on his fundraising prowess in a successful race for majority whip against Rep. Robert S. Walker (R-Pa.). A former pest exterminator, DeLay had already been in Congress since 1985, and his fundraising largesse, especially with the huge freshman class of 1994, helped him overtake Walker, who was Rep. Newt Gingrich's best friend.

DeLay became arguably the most ~~effective~~ dictatorial whip in modern House history. He corralled Republicans into a lock-step discipline that blocked much of former President Bill Clinton's agenda in the 1990s, engineered the impeachment of Clinton -- the first time a sitting president had been impeached in over 100 years -- and later turned the House into President Bush's firewall against Senate Republican dissent.

Beyond those legislative accomplishments, DeLay worked to turn Washington's lobbying and business community into a bulwark of Republican support, dispensing legislative favors to those who played along. He was admonished by the House Ethics Committee in 1999 for retaliating against a trade association that hired a Democrat.

But his take-no-prisoners style did not begin to undermine his authority until 2002, when in an unprecedented power play, he jumped into Texas state politics to help secure a Republican majority in the state legislature, then personally pushed a redistricting plan to secure six additional House seats for his GOP majority. During the redistricting fight, Texas Democrats fled the state, in an ultimately futile effort to deny Republicans the quorum needed for a final vote.

In 2004, the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct rebuked DeLay for asking federal aviation officials to track a plane ferrying Democrats to Oklahoma. The panel also rebuked him for improperly pressuring a fellow Republican to vote for the Republicans' Medicare prescription drug benefit and for creating the appearance that Westar Energy Inc. received special consideration in exchange for campaign donations.

The Texas redistricting fight is seen by some as a crowning political achievement, but also his undoing. Travis County's Democratic prosecutor, Ronnie Earle, secured an indictment on charges that DeLay solicited business contributions, then laundered them through Washington and into the campaign coffers of Republican state legislative candidates. Texas law forbids business donations to State House campaigns.

The indictment cost DeLay his leadership post, but the redistricted map may have cost him his seat. DeLay gave up some Republican strongholds in his district to help elect new Republicans in neighboring districts, bringing his own majority down to 55 percent in the 2004 election. This election year promises to be far more difficult.

DeVos Had Personal Meetings with Abramoff

Ted Kahl — Fri, 31 Mar 2006 18:15:38 -0500

From MichiganDems.com:

LANSING–In light of Jack Abramoff’s sentencing to nearly six years in prison for fraud, Michigan Democratic Party Chair Mark Brewer today revealed that Abramoff has long been an ally to GOP gubernatorial candidate Dick DeVos. Business Week and the Associated Press reported in 1999 that Abramoff was “first to sign up” for a meeting with GOP House conservatives hosted by DeVos on the Amway yacht. Brewer demanded that DeVos abide by his own words on accountability and release the photographs of him and Abramoff at that event and from other meetings they had.

“The public needs to know Dick DeVos has had meetings with criminally corrupt GOP lobbyist Jack Abramoff. They probably swapped soft money corruption stories. DeVos’ personal relationship with Abramoff adds to the ethical baggage that DeVos brings to the race for governor- huge soft money contributions, hidden tax breaks for Amway and now dealings with a criminal like Abramoff,” said Brewer. “DeVos should release all the photos of him and Abramoff so that the public can judge their relationship for themselves."

Abramoff attended the meeting of GOP conservatives called the “Potomac River Cruise” hosted by Dick DeVos on the Amway yacht Enterprise in the summer of 1999. Abramoff was the first person to sign up for DeVos’ meeting. Indicted Rep. Tom DeLay, another leader along with DeVos and Abramoff of the GOP culture of corruption, also attended the meeting.

Through his Amway fortune, DeVos helped finance the New Right network of think tanks, pressure groups and media outlets. Members of his family and the other Amway founders, the Van Andels, have sat on the boards of think tanks such as the Heritage Foundation, and backed groups such as the Council for National Policy.

The Council for National Policy (CNP) is a secretive forum, which was first formed in 1981, for leading US conservative political leaders, financiers and religous right activist leaders to organize their respective agendas.

While those involved are from the United States, their organizations and influence cover the globe, both religiously and politically. Members include corporate executives, television evangelists, legislators, former military or high ranking government officers, leaders of 'think tanks' dedicated to molding society and those who many view as "Christian" leadership. Members in many cases are owners or leaders from industry such as lumber, oil, mining, commodities, real estate, the media, including owners of radio, television and print, with all aspects of life covered. Many are involved in education, determining to influence society's direction by direct input with children and youth.

In its 2002 Internal Revenue Service (IRS) return the CNP describes its activities and purpose as "Educational conferences for national leaders in the fields of business, government, religion and academia to explore national policy alternatives. Weekly newsletters are distributed to all members to keep them apprised of member activities and public policy issues. A semi-annual journal is produced from membership meeting speeches," it states .[1]

The CNP, which meets three times a year, gathered ahead of the 2004 Republican National Convention. "The real crux of this is that these are the genuine leaders of the Republican Party, but they certainly aren't going to be visible on television next week," the executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, Barry W. Lynn, told the New York Times.[2]

According to ABC News, "The CNP describes itself as a counterweight against liberal domination of the American agenda." [3]

More directly it has been described as "a highly secretive... a theocratic organization -- what they want is basically religious rule" (Mark Crispin Miller, A Patriot Act).

Jim Ryun is Running Scared from Townhouse Scandal

Bob Fertik — Tue, 28 Mar 2006 18:42:28 -0500

When I ran track in high school in the 1970's, one of my heroes was Jim Ryun, who set the world mile record of 3:51.1 in 1967 and held the record until 1975. But then Ryun became a rightwing Kansas Republican and gained fame for speaking in tongues.

Now Ryun is running again - but now he's running away from investigative bloggers at TPMMuckraker.com. That's because TPM is on the scent of a sweetheart deal between Ryun and the U.S. Family Network (USFN), a sham nonprofit controlled by former DeLay Chief of Staff Ed Buckham and funded by Jack Abramoff's lobbying clients.

Just How Sweet Was Ryun's Townhouse Deal?
By Paul Kiel

USFN bought the house in January of 1999 for $429,000. Almost two years later, they sold it to Ryun for $410,000...

Don Boucher, an appraiser who focuses on residential properties in the D.C. area, said that the property should have appreciated "about 15% or more" during that time period, meaning that it would have sold around $500,000.

Another appraiser, who preferred to remain anonymous because he often works with members of Congress, said that the townhouse should have appreciated "by $100,000 at least." He said the low sale price "wouldn't make sense at all unless there was a fire and the place was gutted." He added, "It looks like they gave it away."

Of course we know that Vietnam ace Duke Cunningham's bribery conviction began with a similar sweetheart real estate deal.

The heroes of the 1970's are ending their careers as jailbirds.

Where have you gone Joe DiMaggio, a nation turns its lonely eyes to you.

The Rightwing Koch Brothers Fund the DLC

Ted Kahl — Thu, 09 Feb 2006 22:44:57 -0500

Do deep-pocketed "philanthropists" necessarily control the organizations they fund? That has certainly been the contention of those who truck in conspiracy theories about the Rockefeller and Ford Foundations funding liberal and neo-liberal organizations. As for the rightwing, journalists such as Joe Conason and Gene Lyons uncovered that the "vast right wing conspiracy" -- or the New Right network of think tanks, media outlets and pressure groups -- was marshalled under rightwing billionaire Richard Mellon Scaife for his Get-Clinton campaign. Prior to the work of Conason and Lyons, Russ Bellant extensively documented in "The Coors Connection" how the Coors Family, Scaife and other wealthy rightwingers have funded the New Right movement since the early '70's. Among these rightwing benefactors are the Koch brothers. But the Kochs have been working both sides of the fence. As Bill Berkowitz writes, the Koch brothers have also been funding the Democratic Leadership Council.

According to SourceWatch, a project of the Center for Media & Democracy, the brothers are "leading contributors to the Koch family foundations, which supports a network of Conservative organizations and think tanks, including Citizens for a Sound Economy, the Manhattan Institute the Heartland Institute, and the Democratic Leadership Council."

Charles Koch co-founded the Cato Institute in 1977, while David helped launch Citizens for a Sound Economy [now FreedomWorks] in 1986.

This is no less stunning than if Scaife or the Coors family were funding the DLC. So do the Kochs just throw money at the DLC -- as long as the Council supports a free-market" (i.e. unrestricted/unregulated corporate power) agenda that the Kochs generally agree with. Or is it more than just that -- does this really buttress what Greens and other disaffected liberals contend -- that the DNC has just become a party of "Republicrats", thanks especially to the DLC? They would say that corporate backers like the rightwing/libertarian Kochs have co-opted the Democratic establishment -- a hostile takeover of (what was once) the opposition.

A Washington Post interview with Thomas Frank, author of "What's the Matter with Kansas?", touches on this question.

In the concluding chapter of "Kansas," Frank assigns "a large part of the blame for the backlash phenomenon" to the "criminal stupidity" of the Democratic Party in abandoning its commitment to labor and economic justice in pursuit of white-collar votes and corporate contributions. The DLC in particular, he writes, thinks that "to collect the votes and -- more important -- the money of these coveted constituencies," Democrats must stand firm on issues like abortion rights while making "endless concessions on economic issues" such as NAFTA, welfare, privatization and deregulation. The result? Democrats become Tweedledum to the Republicans' Tweedledee on the laissez-faire economy, leaving their opponents free to woo blue-collar voters with backlash issues.

Earlier in the book, Frank takes his anti-DLC rhetoric to an even higher pitch. He notes that generous contributions from the Kansas oil billionaires who run Koch Industries have propped up numerous institutions that champion laissez-faire economics, from the Cato Institute to Citizens for a Sound Economy. And he includes the DLC on his list of Koch-funded "hothouses of the right."

"That's crazy," says Ed Kilgore, the DLC's policy director. "If you can't tell the difference between the DLC and the Republicans, you're not paying attention."

Sure, the DLC took some Koch money, Kilgore says. But it has never advocated abandoning the working class or taking economic issues off the table, and it is proud of Clinton's economic record. "If you have to be self-consciously and vocally anti-business in order to be considered a legitimate Democrat or progressive," he says -- well, sheesh: That would rule out the party's current presidential nominee.

Informed of this return fire, Frank seems uncharacteristically exasperated. But his fundamental stance remains: Bring 'em on.

Has the DLC taken economic issues off the table? "Of course they haven't taken them off the table -- they've just become Republicans."

Does a Democrat have to be anti-business? "I don't think I'd call myself anti-business. . . . I'm critical of the species of capitalism that we're living under today."

Is that Koch money innocent? "Okay, it is Koch that funds right-wing organizations. And it's the Democratic Leadership Council that's been working hard for years to push the Democratic Party to the right. Not to the left. To the right."

But isn't that where the American mainstream has been heading for decades? And hasn't he positioned himself way outside it?

Frank concedes this last point, but nothing more.

The Koch brothers also fund "Triad Management", which was at the center of a Republican money laundering scandal back in 1996. In fact, this was the very first Tom DeLay scandal -- and Koch money was present back then as well. For more on "Triad", here is a PBS report on the affair.

In a related thread, Democrats.com member Bill Harding writes:

The following quotes are from today’s NYT Letters to The Editor section. They underscore how Democrats are perceived by a cross-section of readers, under our current “centrist” DLC, stand-for-nothing “leadership.”

Boehner: I’d Consider Stepping Aside As Majority Leader For Tom DeLay

Ted Kahl — Mon, 06 Feb 2006 01:42:15 -0500

From Think Progress:

The right-wing spin is that John Boehner (R-OH), Tom DeLay’s replacement as Majority Leader in the House of Representatives, represents a “clean break” from DeLay. The reality is that Boehner is as tightly connected to K Street lobbyists as any member of Congress. He has handed out tobacco industry checks on the House floor and has been wined and dined by special interests at the world’s most luxurious resorts and golf courses.

In case there was any doubt about where Boehner’s loyalties lie, he cleared it up this morning on Meet the Press. Boehner said that if DeLay is cleared of the criminal charges against him, Boehner would consider stepping aside and letting Delay assume his old role...

Supreme Court to Review Texas Redistricting

Ted Kahl — Mon, 12 Dec 2005 15:05:22 -0500

(AP) The Supreme Court said Monday it would consider the constitutionality of a Texas congressional map engineered by Rep. Tom DeLay that helped Republicans gain seats in Congress.

The 2003 boundaries helped Republicans win 21 of the state's 32 seats in Congress in the last election_ up from 15. They were approved amid a nasty battle between Republican leaders and Democrats and minority groups in Texas.

The contentiousness also reached Washington, where the Justice Department approved the plan although staff lawyers concluded that it diluted minority voting rights. Because of past discrimination against minority voters, Texas is required to get Justice Department approval for any voting changes to ensure they don't undercut minority voting.

Justices will consider a constitutional challenge to the boundaries filed by various opponents. The court will hear two hours of arguments in four separate appeals. Lawyers have been told the case will be argued March 1, so the outcome could affect 2006 elections.