Is DeLay going down?

[Jonathan_Chance]

Alternate title: “Has The Hammer met a harder anvil?”

We should all know by now that House Majority Leader and Representative from Texas (22nd District) has been taking it hard on the ol’ ethics front lately. Fundraising and such last year led him to play some back-office games to ensure the ethics committee didn’t do him too much damage.

But the sharks are beginning to circle. There have been reports in the press of ‘dissatisfaction’ of unnamed house members for DeLay’s getting them committed in the Terry Schaivo thing and being on the wrong side of public opinion there (however it played to the grass roots of the party the national polls were against intervention).

And two reports are out there today.

From The Washington Post: DeLay’s Trip in 1997 Questioned

A six-day trip to Moscow in 1997 by then-House Majority Whip Tom DeLay (R-Tex.) was underwritten by business interests lobbying in support of the Russian government, according to four people with firsthand knowledge of the trip arrangements.

DeLay reported that the trip was sponsored by a Washington-based nonprofit organization. But interviews with those involved in planning DeLay’s trip say the expenses were covered by a mysterious company registered in the Bahamas that also paid for an intensive $440,000 lobbying campaign.

and The New York Times: Political Groups Paid Two Relatives of House Leader

WASHINGTON, April 5 - The wife and daughter of Tom DeLay, the House majority leader, have been paid more than $500,000 since 2001 by Mr. DeLay’s political action and campaign committees, according to a detailed review of disclosure statements filed with the Federal Election Commission and separate fund-raising records in Mr. DeLay’s home state, Texas.

Now, I’m not really trying to judge here. But my interest has always been in how these stories play out. And DeLay has sure been having some hard times of late.

On the other hand, he’s hellaciously powerful and a great political survivor. So whether he can weather this storm is an open question.

So can he? Or will he lose his slot as majority leader or even lose his seat?

[RTFirefly]

I’m thinking that he’s about where Nixon was in March 1973. So I’m hoping the analogy will hold, and DeLay won’t go down until late summer or early fall of 2006.

But it could be sooner. It looks as if the grand juries and other stories out there have created an environment which possibly has caused Dubya to lift the veil of protection which has allowed no Republican to attack Tom DeLay on our soil since 1812, to paraphrase Jerry Falwell. Because Republicans are clearly among the leakers now.

Apropos of DeLay’s daughter, here’s a squib from the WaPo from back in 2000, courtesy of Atrios:

United Parcel Service provided a chartered flight between Washington and Las Vegas for between 50 and 60 people–including lobbyists, top aides and political supporters–at DeLay’s request, according to a company spokesman. DeLay flew separately on a Federal Express corporate jet. Lobbyists with the National Association of Manufacturers, the D.C. law firm Verner, Liipfert, Bernhard, McPherson and Hand, and the National Association of Convenience Stores were among those present for the weekend.

The weekend included a late-night party Saturday in DeLay’s suite at the Rio Hotel and Casino, which featured a living room, bar and hot tub on the balcony. DeLay was not present, aides said; the event was hosted by his daughter, Dani Ferro, the campaign manager for DeLay’s reelection campaign. After the party, Ferro told associates that a lobbyist poured champagne on her while she was in the hot tub.

Let’s not skip the juicy details!

[ITR_champion]

In your dreams. The House Republicans have already removed ethics constraints specifically to allow Mr. Dealy to continue getting away with his crimes, have they not? And the media paid no significant amount of attention when that happened, right? And the only way that Delay can be removed from office is if the House Ethics Committee, which is controlled by Republicans, decides to take action against him. What’s to stop the committee from simply amending the rules again, as many times as necessary, to redefine all of Delay’s crimes out of existence.

Look. The House Republicans have two options. First they could seriously begin proceedings against Delay. This only brings down a storm of negative publicity. Second, they can continue to assist Delay in covering up his crimes. Tihs brings down no almost negative publicity, as long as the media doesn’t report on Delay’s crimes or on the cover up. And the media, as we all know, is controlled by the Republican Party, so they haven’t seriuosly reported Delay’s crimes in the past and won’t in the future. So what advantage is there, to any House Republican, to turn against Delay?

It was obvious months ago that Delay’s corruption was so massive that it would merit impeachment by any reasonable standard. In a Congress dominated by Republicans, there are no reasonable standards. End of story.

[squeegee]

The thread title evokes a horrifying image.

[Paul_in_Qatar]

I do not wish to engage in wishful thinking. He may or may not go down. More importantly, he and people like him are the ones who will squander the legacy of Ronald Reagan and split the GOP.

The long-term impact of Mister DeLay and those like him are more interesting (to me) than are the short-term news headlines.

[Little_Nemo]

DeLay still has a lot of power and he doesn’t hesitate to use it in his own defense. And many fellow Republicans still instinctively want to avoid a scandal involving one of their most prominent colleagues. But at some point the balance will tip very suddenly. A group of Republicans will gather and decide among themselves that DeLay is hurting the party. Once that decision is made to cut him loose, his downfall will be quick and massive. His current enemies of course will be all over him. But many of his current friends will suddenly become even more extreme in their opposition in order to disassociate themselves from him in his fall.

[Icarus]

@Little Nemo

But many of his current friends will suddenly become even more extreme in their opposition in order to disassociate themselves from him in his fall.

That is if they have even a milligram of honor left in them. …looking…looking…darn, must be hidden with those WMD…

[Jonathan_Chance]

@Little Nemo

But at some point the balance will tip very suddenly.

This is what I’m trying to get at. In the media and politics it’s called ‘critical mass’ when a story goes from little-covered to suddenly being ‘THE STORY!!!’ and has the power to bring down anyone. As Little Nemo defined at some point the party decides they’re better off without him than with him and over the side he goes. It happened to Trent Lott over what is, after all, a very minor point.

I disagree with RTFirefly however, in that if it’s going to happen it will happen sometime this year. Barring something huge breaking there won’t be this sort of thing close to the mid-terms.

[RTFirefly]

@Jonathan Chance

This is what I’m trying to get at. In the media and politics it’s called ‘critical mass’ when a story goes from little-covered to suddenly being ‘THE STORY!!!’ and has the power to bring down anyone. As Little Nemo defined at some point the party decides they’re better off without him than with him and over the side he goes. It happened to Trent Lott over what is, after all, a very minor point.

That’s pretty much how it is. And if Bush and/or Rove has already decided to let things take their own course, then it’s game over for DeLay; it’s only a matter of time.

I disagree with RTFirefly however, in that if it’s going to happen it will happen sometime this year. Barring something huge breaking there won’t be this sort of thing close to the mid-terms.

But I do think DeLay could hold out until he’s indicted. And since that grand jury hasn’t even been formed yet, that could take awhile.

[ITR_champion]

Not that I enjoy raining on everyone’s parade, but remember this? In the earlier Tom Delay scandal, relating to fundraising in Texas, there was rock-solid evidence of Delay creating and organizing a PAC that shifted money to Republican candidates in exchange, quid pro quo, for certain pieces of legislation. If that wasn’t enough for Delay’s corruption to become “THE STORY”, that what would be? Having sex with an intern, I guess.

[BrainGlutton]

Just to put all this in context – from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Delay#Ethics_investigations:

Ethics investigations

During the summer of 2004, DeLay was investigated for ethical violations stemming from complaints filed by Democratic Representative Chris Bell of Texas.

On September 30, 2004, the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct (the “Ethics Committee”) found that DeLay had violated House rules in 2003 in his efforts to pass a bill concerning health care. The committee admonished DeLay for having made an offer to Representative Nick Smith, who was retiring, that DeLay would endorse Smith’s son for the seat if Smith would vote in favor of the bill. This admonishment caused the conservative-leaning Judicial Watch to issue a call for DeLay to resign as Majority Leader.

On October 6, 2004, the Ethics Committee admonished DeLay for a second time, this time for violations stemming from the Bell complaint. Specifically, it stated that he should not have asked the Federal Aviation Administration to track a small plane that he believed to be carrying Democratic Texas state legislators, who were fleeing to Oklahoma from Texas to prevent a quorum, thus stopping a redistricting plan they did not approve of.

The panel also admonished DeLay for his dealings with Westar Energy, a Kansas-based firm; it cited memos from Westar stating that they believed $56,000 in donations to DeLay’s PAC and others would get them “a seat at the table”. Subsequently, DeLay appeared at a Westar-hosted golf fundraiser, “just as the House-Senate conference on major energy legislation…was about to get underway”. This, the conference stated, violated the requirement that lawmakers may not solicit political donations “that may create even the appearance” that they will lead to special access or special treatment.

However, the committee decided to delay action on Bell’s third charge, dealing with improper fundraising by the DeLay-headed Texans for a Republican Majority PAC; Bell charged that it improperly raised funds from corporations to channel to local Texas legislative races. The matter is currently being investigated by a grand jury in Travis County, Texas.

On September 21, 2004, the grand jury indicted three members of Texans for a Republican Majority, including its executive director, on charges of money laundering and accepting illegal campaign contributions. DeLay and his supporters contended that this investigation and the indictments were politically motivated maneuvers by the Democratic Travis County, Texas District Attorney Ronnie Earle - a controversial and colorful political figure with a history of pursuing unconventional indictments against elected officials including Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison. Fearing a possible indictment of DeLay, which they feel is politically motivated on November 17, 2004, House Republicans changed an early 1990s rule that would force House Leaders to step down if indicted; the new rules will allow a committee to review any indictment to determine if it is politically motivated and if it is not politically motivated the House Leader would be required to step down. However, a firestorm of protest from citizens, including rank-and-file Republicans, forced DeLay himself to back off from the rule change on January 3, 2005.

On November 18, 2004, the Ethics Committee also issued a statement admonishing Bell, advising him that his accusation violated a rule barring “innuendo, speculative assertions or conclusory statements”. DeLay responded by criticizing Bell as well as Democratic House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi.

On March 10, 2005, news reports stated that “A delegation of Republican House members including Majority Leader Tom DeLay accepted an expense-paid trip to South Korea in 2001 from a registered foreign agent despite House rules that bar the acceptance of travel expenses from foreign agents, according to government documents and travel reports filed by the House members.”

[RTFirefly]

@ITR champion

Not that I enjoy raining on everyone’s parade, but remember this? In the earlier Tom Delay scandal, relating to fundraising in Texas, there was rock-solid evidence of Delay creating and organizing a PAC that shifted money to Republican candidates in exchange, quid pro quo, for certain pieces of legislation. If that wasn’t enough for Delay’s corruption to become “THE STORY”, that what would be? Having sex with an intern, I guess.

The date on that column is April 11, 2004. It was hard for a lot of normally newsworthy things to get front-page treatment that month: four American mercenaries had recently gotten fried in Fallujah; Iraq was turning into a conflagration every which way, between the Sunni insurgency in the north and west, and Muqtada al-Sadr’s people in the south; and in a few weeks, the Abu Ghraib story would break. Plus our fair-haired boy Ahmed Chalabi was apparently an Iranian spy, and Bush and the U.N. couldn’t seem to find anyone to lead the interim government which was supposed to take the reins that June.

And - oh, yeah! - we were having a Presidential election too. But even that was getting pushed further down the front page by Iraq. So there just wasn’t much room for DeLay’s problems to become ‘THE STORY’ that month.

But as Josh Marshall points out, old DeLay corruption stories are getting recycled now - stories that didn’t get much notice when they first came out, but that are very much a part of the overall DeLay corruption story, are getting re-run now. It’s piling-on time, apparently.

[Jonathan_Chance]

That’s exactly it. Once the press corps smells blood (which is a combination of damaging stories and an ‘off the record’ feel that the party leadership is thinking DeLay is a liability) they’ll begin hammering the story until there’s some sort of denouement.

[cmkeller]

I doubt he’ll go down unless he chooses to fall on his own sword. Think Bob Livingstone and Newt Gingrich in late 1998. They could have clung to power if they really wanted to, but preferred not to bog down the party with their own personal issues.

[pullin]

@Jonathan Chance

Is DeLay going down?

Only if he got drunk and drowned his girlfriend.

Oh. wait…

[Annie-Xmas]

That depends what your definition of “is” is.

[Reeder]

Not until the mid-terms when the voters in his district come to their senses.

[jayjay]

@Reeder

Not until the mid-terms when the voters in his district come to their senses.

In Texas?

[squeegee]

@jayjay

In Texas?

Maybe. One can hope.

49 percent said they would vote for someone other than DeLay if a congressional election in the 22nd District were at hand. Thirty-nine percent said they would stick with him.

[Dangerosa]

It also depends on the pubbies themselves. If DeLay even hints he might run for president when they want Jeb, they may take him down themselves. They showed little mercy with McCain.