Tom DeLay v. The People

Former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Tx) seems to have changed his views somewhat about the American legal system. Following his indictment yesterday, Delay gave a prepared statement, in which he called the indictment:

"...an act of blatant political partisanship, [by] a rogue district attorney...wholly unsupported by the facts...one of the weakest, most baseless indictments in American history. It is a sham...the product of a coordinated, premeditated campaign of political retribution, the all-too-predictable result of a vengeful investigation led by a partisan fanatic."

That the United States could have a "rogue district attorney" in power is shocking enough. The coincidence that this "rogue" just happened to have jurisdiction over a case involving one of our nation's leaders is also striking. But what's truly stunning is that this "rogue," despite the predictable and partisan nature of his attack, could still get a grand jury of American citizens to indict one of the most powerful politicians in the state, as well as the entire nation!

After all, as the grand jury foreman told the Associated Press, "[prosecutor] Ronnie Earle didn't indict him. The grand jury indicted him."

Apparently, not only are some American prosecutors motivated by forces other than sweet Lady Justice, but some American jurors are not to be trusted, either! In retrospect, this ought not come as a surprise to anyone who's followed DeLay's career.

After all, one of DeLay's most fervent crusades has been to save helpless corporations from the predations of greedy Americans, and the American jurors who side with them. DeLay sells it, literally (through the very same political action committee that got him indicted), as "tort reform," and what it does is take decisions about wrongdoing and punishment out of the hands of American juries, preventing them from rendering verdicts sufficiently harsh to dissuade American companies from similar wrongdoing in the future. It also allows companies to predict the cost of malfeasance and negligence, permitting them to allow for such things, even when doing so might be lethal, as part of a now-capped cost-benefit analysis. In these matters, too, American juries can not be trusted.

So, Tom DeLay is not selfishly protecting only himself from the corruption and weakness and stupidity of the average Americans who sit on juries, he's also protecting the most vulnerable among us: American corporations.

Clearly, "rogue" elements of law enforcement, and "sham" indictments handed up by American citizens must be stopped.

But wait! What's that? It turns out there are times when law enforcement must NOT be reined in, but given MORE power. When might that be?

Well, specifically, despite his shocking expose of partisan investigations, Tom DeLay believes it's okay to empower SOME law enforcement to work in unprecedented NEW ways with OTHER law enforcement -- even deceiving them, if necessary -- IF the goal is something benign, such as, ironically, his efforts to track down Texas legislators as part of the very same partisan campaign to gain control of Texas that, as I mentioned, got him indicted.

And, it turns out, there are other times when he trusts law enforcement AND prosecutors AND American juries SO much that he's willing to put his life in their hands! That is, if by "his life" we actually mean "a poor black man accused of a crime and defended by incompetent counsel's life." Tom DeLay has voted time and again to reduce the ways in which mistakes and miscarriages of justice can be revealed and rectified before criminals are put to death.

So, to sum up: Tom DeLay trusts law enforcement, prosecutors and juries fully and fights to give them new powers when their targets are:

• Accused criminals facing the death penalty
• Elected Democratic officials

Tom DeLay finds law enforcement, prosecutors and juries suspect, over-reaching and susceptible to vengeful investigation unsupported by fact when their targets are:

• American corporations
• Political-action committees
• Tom DeLay

In fact, when you look at the case of People v. Tom DeLay in the context of DeLay's career, it actually might be more appropriate to call it Tom DeLay v. The People. Call it Justice DeLayed.