Tom DeLay’s Legal Defense Fund Needs A Legal Defense Fund
By on Aug 5th, 2005 at 5:14 pm
Tom DeLay’s Legal Defense Fund Needs A Legal Defense Fund
As you may remember, we’ve been keeping a close eye on Tom DeLay’s legal defense fund. Through the “Drop the Hammer” campaign, we pressured three major corporate donors to stop contributing.
Now, DeLay’s legal defense fund is facing more problems:
Congressional records show that DeLay accepted contributions from five lobbyists and one lobbying firm totaling $8,000 between 2001 and 2004. He has returned $3,500 from two of the donors.
By my calculation, that leaves $4,500 in illegal contributions outstanding.
Full disclosure: four other politicians, from both sides of the aisle, also accepted illegal campaign contributions from lobbyists.
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Bush
Business
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Glenn Beck
Global Warming
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
where has the media been in covering the DeLay scandal? Why has this dropped off the face of the earth?
August 5th, 2005 at 5:29 pmDeLay is toast whether he goes to jail or not. He will be working at Mickey D’s at best.
August 5th, 2005 at 5:29 pmThat “four other members” is a typo, right?
August 5th, 2005 at 6:18 pmAll on both sides need to be in prison. That is the only thing that will stop it.
August 5th, 2005 at 6:25 pmI think and propose that campaigning should be restricted to print.
When I vote in local elections I use a guide. Why should it be any different for all seats?
Recounts need to be funded by means other than donations.
These things are why the people we elect will never truly represent us. On either side.
I realize the people in his district are probably somewhat more conservative than mine, but when they see the money he is plowing to his friends (ie – the recent 2.2 bil he inserted into the bill after it left the conference committee), they have to be slightly embarassed. I mean, c’mon.
Why do they keep electing the guy? Can any Texans here tell us.
August 5th, 2005 at 6:26 pmI don’t know about his district. It is outside Houston, and like evrything else around Houston it is Oil and Jesus.
August 5th, 2005 at 6:40 pmI live in a district that is 83% Republican. It is old people and money. Near Dallas.
#6, Brian , that’s a pretty accurate description of Texas. Old oil money, family connections, Jesus and big hair and football. I don’t know what else these people are thinking of as they elect him over again.
August 5th, 2005 at 7:01 pmThe man is a walking example of a corrupt politician. I have contacted Ronnie Earle, the D.A. who has been investigating Delay and offered my support. I am extremely disappointed that this isn’t a regular weekly update on all the big national newspapers, but then again, why should I be disappointed — it’s just more of the same mutual backscratching at our expense.
Harry Reid took this money too, $3000 I think. He needs to give it back.
August 5th, 2005 at 8:30 pmHouston is not just Oil & Jesus… don’t forget that Houston is also the Cocaine distributor for America!
August 5th, 2005 at 11:19 pmHi, my name is Tom Delay and I’d like a job.
Mickey D’s pimpled teenager: “WTF, we couldn’t trust you in Congress, how can you trust us with our hamburgers?”
August 5th, 2005 at 11:29 pmOkay it’s late: I meant – WTF, we couldn’t trust you in Congress, how can WE trust YOU with our hamburgers?
Sorry for the dyslexia.
August 5th, 2005 at 11:30 pmMost of the voters, my opinion only, are older traditional (close minded) people that take their info from the 10 minutes of news each evening.
We all know how “accurate” the reporting is. cBS, ABC (anything but correct), NBc (nunya bussness co.), and Faux news.
Also, it helps to have your fiends counting the votes.
(not a typo)
“Those that vote decide nothing, those that count the votes decide everything.” – Stalin
August 6th, 2005 at 12:20 amSheila Jackson Lee was all gung-ho about the energy bill. Her voter base and constituents must also want the jobs and boost to their economies the bill will provide, just like Delay’s constituents. Real Texans don’t like their boy getting smeared either. He ain’t going nowhere.
What, did you run out of Rove rumours today?
August 6th, 2005 at 1:39 amJobs? Giving subsidies to already highly profitable companies doesn’t create jobs, it just returns the bribes that got you elected… This is just money laundering on a grand scale, just like Noe money laundering fund raising dollars illegally for the GOP through ‘fake’ donors.
You discount an act of treason and the breach of CIA security as ‘rumors’? No wonder Republicans sell weapons to tyrants – they have no consciences if you’re an example!
August 6th, 2005 at 4:11 amExpect to barely notice a slight statistical blip in small plane crashes, all GOP, in the next 20 to 30 years. DeLay will be one of the first to go down. Is it providence or the CIA? Is there any difference?
August 6th, 2005 at 7:29 amCIA
August 6th, 2005 at 8:06 amHas anyone noticed recently exposed lobbyist who has been secretly directing Democratic Party strategy? He is the very powerful NYC “publicist” Ken Sunshine.
August 6th, 2005 at 8:14 amNow that he has filed his status as a lobbyist, isn’t it true that he was a lobbyist all along? Are his appearances on national news shows, which identify him only as a publicist, a thinly disguised attempt by a de facto lobbyist, to influence laws while concealing his true job status? Does this concealment of his being a lobbyist warrant a FCC fine or admonishment for the shows, which know full well what his status is, but refuse to reveal it to the public as they should?
This Ken Sunshine? He’s a Hollywood and NY celebtity publicist.
http://newyorkmetro.com/nymetro/news/politics/newyork/features/5449/
August 6th, 2005 at 9:28 amI think any dust bunny E.L. can find about Dems gives him a Woody. With the Hubble Telescope, this and The Air America Radio financial stuff still ain’t diddly.
August 6th, 2005 at 9:31 amBreaking! Breaking! Alert All Media! This Just In!
Liberal Democrats still engaging in extra-marital oral sex!
August 6th, 2005 at 9:39 amDAMN LIBRUL MEDIA!
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/8842552/
August 6th, 2005 at 9:48 amMaybe DeLay and Rove can share a cell?
. . .
August 6th, 2005 at 10:57 am#22, or maybe delay and rover, shrubya, cheeney (the only living heart donor), libby, card, and the bunch can share….
SHARE A NOOSE.
August 6th, 2005 at 12:47 pmThis doesn’t help much seeing that Reid took a nice sum of money as well. I agree with the post earlier – Reid should quickly give that money back fast.
August 6th, 2005 at 6:08 pmMisterOpus1,
Well that’s a nice wild claim about Reid, and yet you supply no specific reference of what money, where it went, whether it’s considered illegal by ethics standards, nor anything else. If Reid actually did anything wrong, then that should be dealt with fairly. Considering Delay was already censured 3 times, and he’s on his way to the 4th without any real punishment – then your statements about Reid in this context is silly.
Everytime a republican crook is caught – instead of people like you actually have any morals – you simply say well the other guys are doing it too! Frankly NO ONE should be doing it, and stupid assholes like you who don’t hold the republican party responsible is why you’re all so damned crooked!
August 6th, 2005 at 6:13 pmI think the claim about Reid goes back to 1998, as it does with several Republicans and Democrats — the amounts were all under $5000, as I recall. That doesn’t make it right, but it does offer a perspective that certain contribution rules were arcane in the past, and the abuses of the others in Congress don’t hold a candle to the abuses by Tom Delay.
August 6th, 2005 at 6:38 pmDear Obvious,
Just who the f$ck do you think I am, dear reactionist twit? You have erroneously labelled me in your knee-jerk dipsh$t reaction as someone in leagues with the Conservatives, when all I did was merely read the story posted above as well as the one in USAToday:
“WASHINGTON (AP)  House Republican leader Tom DeLay and Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid are among five lawmakers who have accepted lobbyist donations to their legal defense funds despite rules prohibiting such contributions.
Congressional records show that DeLay accepted contributions from five lobbyists and one lobbying firm totaling $8,000 between 2001 and 2004. He has returned $3,500 from two of the donors.
Reid accepted one lobbyist contribution of $3,000 in 1999.
…Reid spokeswoman Tessa Hafen said the senator received a contribution from a longtime friend who had registered as a lobbyist shortly before the donation. She said Reid was not aware of the registration at the time.
Hafen said the legal defense fund account is closed and Reid has asked the Senate’s ethics committee how to proceed.”
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-08-05-lobbyist-donations_x.htm
There’s nothing “wild” about my claim, dear sh$tmonger, other than what was simply printed in the paper. I have full confidence in Reid, and I also fully believe he likely didn’t have knowledge of this at all back in ‘99, as I also have full confidence that he’ll likely eventually give the money back.
What I DO know, however, is what I read in my backwards Kansas newspapers that give the same public scrutiny towards Reid with Delay ON THIS SPECIFIC charge (Wichita Eagle, for example). So logically it would do Reid a bit of public saving face to give the money back, REGARDLESS of his innocence.
Is that good enough for you, dear twat? Or do you need more proof of how “blue” my blood runs?:
http://www.dailykos.com/user/MisterOpus1
Do us all true Lefties a favor and stop flailing your arms around like a little recalcitrant, temper-tamtrum child at anything you feel might be considered a slight “threat” to your strange little world. And do us all a favor and stop arguing that a twitchy freeper while you’re at it. Paranoia does not fit our side well at all.
Opus
August 6th, 2005 at 6:45 pmNo need for the holier than thou attitude, Mr. Opus. A Democrat in Kansas is almost as far from “the left” as you can get without being a Republican.
August 6th, 2005 at 9:45 pm“No need for the holier than thou attitude, Mr. Opus. A Democrat in Kansas is almost as far from “the leftâ€? as you can get without being a Republican.”
I have no desire to get involved in an irrelevant pissing contest on who’s more of a Democrat that’s wholly beside the point of this thread. But I do find it a bit strange how you can slyly insult me by stating how by my mere geography I am one step shy of being a Republican while in the same breath tell me not to hold an attitude. You may also know very little of my location (Lawrence, KS), which is decisively a liberal city and location amidst a very conservative state.
Again, entirely beside the point. But if you’re really wondering where my attitude resides, look no further than me being wrongly accused and irresponsibly called a “stupid asshole”. I have a slight tendency to take little challenges like that head on.
August 7th, 2005 at 12:44 amWell tell us, Mr. Octopus, What’s The matter With Kansas? I’ve read your diaries, you are a Democrat by choice or default. Who isn’t? Not much committment there. I’m not a Democrat, by default or definition. I know plenty of Democrats who are assholes. What’s your point? Some of us choose to vote for the lesser of two assholes because that’s the only choice we have. That’s politics.
August 7th, 2005 at 6:31 amComment #31 is not me.
August 7th, 2005 at 2:25 pmComment #32 is not me.
August 7th, 2005 at 4:23 pmComment#34 is not me
August 7th, 2005 at 4:23 pmLyle, or whoever is perpetrating as Lyle:
“Well tell us, Mr. Octopus”
Mr. Octopus? How long did it take you to come up with that witty funny? Cute.
“What’s The matter With Kansas?”
What would I be able to tell you that T. Frank or David Brock hasn’t told you already about the eventual rise of the modern day GOP and how they’ve overtaken the moral values argument, especially here in the Midwest?
“I’ve read your diaries, you are a Democrat by choice or default. Who isn’t? Not much committment there.”
Quite true, but perhaps some clarification on my part is needed (and since you refuse to discuss the topic at hand and focus instead on me, I’m happy to divulge further). I don’t necessarily consider myself a “Democrat” – as if I’m a card-carrying member, per se. I made the mistake of stating or implying as such earlier. Rather, my views tend to be much more in line with the current Democratic message. I don’t know if that makes me a “liberal”, a “progressive” or whatever you want to call it. I’ve seen those terms thrown around with so many different working definitions that I try to avoid using them. I guess the best term is that I simply consider myself a Lefty. If the Dem. party is in that corner, so be it. If the Repubs. or any other party hold similar views than myself, then I’d likely affiliate myself in line with their party. Hopefully that clears any misconception up.
“I’m not a Democrat, by default or definition.”
Congrats.
“I know plenty of Democrats who are assholes.”
As do I. The “Obvious” poster was seemingly one of them, but I’m more than happy to be mistaken.
“What’s your point?”
I’m trying to figure your point out, sir. My response was specifically towards an individual named “Obvious” who mistakenly believed I had an opposing political view on the matter at hand. I clarified my point with him/her specifically that I am not what he/she might have mistakenly believed me to be.
So what exactly are you attempting to accomplish here? And while you’re at it, do you actually have anything further to add in regards to the topic of this thread? I’m sure the starter (Judd) would likely appreciate some sincere discourse from you in regards to the actual topic here.
“Some of us choose to vote for the lesser of two assholes because that’s the only choice we have. That’s politics.”
Agreed. But again I’m trying to figure out what your particular point is here. I don’t dismiss the fact that there are Democratic nitwits. However that does not negate the fact that my overall views tend to side with the Democratic message right now.
So what are you trying to say again, sir?
August 7th, 2005 at 7:01 pmSee… LIEly is doing what the rest of the nazi=repuglithugs do, turning the focus off of the real issues. If you answer their questions, you become less powerful in THEIR EYES.
You MUST ask them, are you a REAL republithug? I mean, does your bank account look like a reall republithug or are you a wann-a-bee?
Are they in favor of excluding civil rights from all persons?
This will SHUT THEM DOWN.
If they answer, (if… ha ha…. you will see what kind of creeps they really are) you win.
This is their M.O.
Use it to THEIR DISADVANTAGE.
August 8th, 2005 at 4:16 amREPUBLICAN = NAZI
Always have, always will. Not but = to.
August 8th, 2005 at 4:18 amlast post didn’t get the full text…
REPUBLICAN = NAZI
Always have, always will. Not greater than nor less than but equal to.
August 8th, 2005 at 4:19 amAs long as they make us fight within, they take us away from the repugnacan issues that can sink their ships.
Shut them down early, and dismiss them early.
Move on and let’s talk about the corruption that has taken over the government.
August 8th, 2005 at 4:24 amLyle — SHUT UP!
August 8th, 2005 at 9:28 amoffshore pick
You can also check out some relevant information on top online kasino
October 21st, 2005 at 5:51 am781
You are invited to check some helpful info about 430
November 5th, 2005 at 11:39 pm