Tom Delay Atty: Evidence Of Guilt Is Proof of Innocence And Vice Versa

Wednesday, October 19, 2005

The attorney for Texas Congressman Tom DeLay, citing the fact that there was no evidence that Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle participated in the Grand Jury deliberations that returned money laundering and conspiracy charges against Mr. DeLay and alleged co-conspirator Jim Ellis, has asked a judge to dismiss the charges,citing the fact that if there is no evidence that Mr. Earle violated any law, then of course that must mean that he did. Violate the law, that is. Follow me here, people.

Huston attorney Dick DeGuerin, also citing the fact that Grand Jury testimony and deliberations are secret is seeking access to those deliberations and testimony in order to find the evidence that he says can’t find any evidence of in order to have Mr. DeLay’s charges dismissed. Apparently, Mr. DeGuerin thinks this line of defense a whole lot easier than trying to actually prove Mr. DeLay is innocent of the charges.

In an effort to explain Mr. DeLay’s attorneys reasoning, Unnamed White House Source Wegman (Pudgy) Waterhouse, speaking on the condition of anonymity said, ” It is well known in the State of Texas that evidence that a crime has been committed has always been seen as proof positive that no crime has been committed, while no evidence that a crime has occurred usually means that the non-accused are guilty. Just ask Ann Richards. Texas Republicans used the fact that they couldn’t find any proof that she was a Lesbian to show the people of Texas that she must be a Lesbian during the campaign that made George W. Bush Governor; why else would she have gone to such great lengths to hide the evidence that she was if she wasn’t?”

Continuing to speak as anonymously as he’s ever done before, Waterhouse continued, “And before you start saying something stupid like, ‘well, that’s just Texas’, let me tell you that it’s not just Texas, my Liberal cow pie friend. Republicans were able to show Americans that the fact that John Kerry received three Purple Hearts and a Bronze and Silver Star in Vietnam proved he was a coward, while the fact that George W. Bush went AWOL from the Texas Air National Guard was proof that he was a great military leader. Or better yet, that former Georgia Senator Max Cleland’s loss of both legs and an arm in combat proved he was soft on Terror. You’ve heard of the old saying: The Evidence Speaks For Itself? Well, that has no bearing on anything to do with Republican politics. We speak for the evidence, not the evidence. The evidence has a biased point of view and shouldn’t be allowed to speak for itself. It’s even possible that the evidence is a traitor and should be sent to Guantanamo Bay, along with anyone who’s seen the evidence.”

Excited Republican attorneys are waiting to see if a judge can be found, other than Antonin Scalia that is, who’ll buy this load of…line of reasoning. If so, they plan to use it to show that the fact that Scooter Libby and Karl Rove spoke to various reporters about Valerie Plame being in the CIA is proof that they never spoke to reporters about Valerie Plame, that the fact that the White House knew there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq was proof that they were correct in invading that country in order to find weapons of mass destruction and that former Halliburton vice president Dick Cheney’s awarding of hundreds of millions of dollars in no-bid contracts to Halliburton proves that…proves that…oh, forget it.