apparently the defense of tom delay's pac will be that corporate contributions the pac sent the rnc wasn't the same money the rnc sent texas candidates because the rnc had a firewall.
right. i'll swallow that. feed me another one.
ok, let me backtrack a little. i'm getting ahead of myself.
near as i can tell, the firewall is two bank accounts. making the scheme "blind" by having separate books and account managers has no effect on the money trail: small individual donations from all over the country go into one account, big donations and funds from businesses go into the other; the second account is used to funnel cash to candidates in states with no restrictions on size or source of funds; the first account is used for states like texas, where it's illegal to give corporate money to a candidate.
ergo, it's not the same money. get it?
wow! where were these guys during monicagate? don't they remember "i did not have sexual relations with that woman" or "it depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is"?
i don't see any difference between what delay's pac does and what drug traffickers do to launder money, or between what the rnc does and what money-laundering banks do.
do they really think they can fool a jury? or do they really believe it's legal?!
if they sincerely think it's legal, no wonder the dems call it a "culture of corruption," because you've got to totally shut down your common sense to think it's legal.
on the other hand, maybe that's how they might fool a jury: get'em to turn off their bullshit detectors.
the prosecutors better take nothing for granted. they're going to have to lead the jury thru the whole argument step by step with great attention to detail.
otherwise, the gop lawyers might muddy the waters with a johnny cochran defense. you know, like: if it don't make sense, it's innocence.
3 hours ago
No comments:
Post a Comment