Prosecutors: DeLay money-laundering deal was tied to redistricting

http://www.statesman.com/news/texas/prosecutors-delay-money-swap-was-tied-to-redistricting-1053266.html

Analyst testifies that DeLay PAC needed to borrow to have money to donate.

By Laylan Copelin AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF

Published: 10:36 p.m. Tuesday, Nov. 16, 2010

The Tom DeLay money-laundering trial took a contentious turn Tuesday as prosecutors tried to offer the 2003 redistricting battle in Texas as a motive for a corporate money swap during the 2002 elections.

Judge Pat Priest had warned prosecutors that they should limit their questions to the history of the congressional redistricting and not ask about politics. DeLay's lawyer Dick DeGuerin repeatedly objected — and Priest often sustained the objections — as prosecutors tried to coax their expert witness through the retelling of the drawing of the state's congressional districts.

"We're not here in a war between Republicans and Democrats," Priest said during one exchange between the lawyers.

This is all so predictable.

Rec

I live in Texas, I despise Delay, and the redistricting here was horrific. (Just to let you know where I stand.)

But money-laundering? Doesn't that typically mean a transaction where you try to hide money that you've gotten ILLEGALLY?

In Texas, PACs may accept corporate money. They may not, however, contribute any of that money to candidates. Delay's TRMPAC did not give any corporate money to candidates. I'm not aware of any Tx Ethics Commission rule that says you can't give your corporate money to another PAC's corporate fund (which TRMPAC did). And PACs may accept individuals' contributions from other PACs - that, truly, is done all the time and is perfectly OK so long as it's duly reported to the Ethics Commission. And I gather that TRMPAC reported the check from the RNC as required.

So... the prosecution is trying to prove the intent to money-launder, even though the actual transactions were not in violation of the ethics rules. This is a stretch for me, as much as I hate the guy. Furthermore, convicting him won't keep other nefarious PACs from doing the same thing -- they'll just be more careful about it.

So I'm on the fence about this one. If he goes to jail, I won't shed a tear (in fact I'll have an extra glass of wine to celebrate). But I wish we'd be sending him to jail from something unequivocally against the law.