Here's my first take on this indictment (I've only read the indictment and nothing more for now): The indictment is three pages in length. Other than a statement that "one or more" of 3 individuals, including Tom DeLay, entered into an illegal conspiracy, I can't find a single sentence tying Tom DeLay to a crime. That is, there's not a single sentence tying DeLay to the contribution. The indictment describes the alleged conduct of two other individuals, but nothing about DeLay. You would think if Ronnie Earle had even a thin reed of testimony linking DeLay to the contribution, it would have been noted in the indictment to justify the grand jury's action. Moreover, not only is there no information about DeLay committing acts in furtherance of a conspiracy, there's no information about DeLay entering into a conspiracy. I honestly believe that unless there's more, this is an egregious abuse of prosecutorial power. It's a disgrace. I understand that not everything has to be contained in an indictment, but how about something!

... The "facts" in the indictment do not make a case for illegal contributions by the corporations because the indictment doesn't even allege that the corporate contributions were made within 60 days of an election. The essential argument is that a contribution was made to the RNC from a Texas PAC, which had received these corporate contributions (the dates of which we don't know), and certain candidates in Texas received money (presumably from the RNC), although not necessarily tracking with the corporate contributions to the PAC. If this sounds convoluted, it is. Based on this information, I see no illegal contribution, let alone no tie to Tom DeLay. I also note that none of the corporations that made contributions have been indicted. (And, by the way, the Texas conspiracy statute requires evidence that those charged actually intended to commit a crime. So, the bar for the government is significant.) The more I analyze this, the more outrageous this appears. I only hope the mainstream media will do a better job reporting on this than on Hurricane Katrina.

Earle has made no bones about his personal and political vendetta. He has openly used this investigation as a Democratic Party fundraising device, charging up Democratic rallies such as one last May that raised over $100,000, featuring Earle on the stump talking about the case and DeLay. According to the American Bar Association Canon of Ethics, Earle has violated DR7-107(A) as well as (B)(1). He also has clearly violated EC8-8, which states that lawyers who serve as public officers "should not engage in activities in which his personal or professional interests are or foreseeably may be in conflict with his official duties."

That has nothing to do with any question of whether DeLay violated the law, of course, but it has plenty to do with whether Earle presented a balanced and honest case to the Travis County grand jury.

Neither the RNC nor RNSEC constitute a political party under Texas election law. They are considered PACs, just as the DNC is.

Corporations in Texas could have legally made contributions to the RNC or RNSEC during the period in question under Texas election law.

There was no violation of the Texas Election Code. There was no conspiracy. The underlying transaction was legal. Had corporations sent money directly to the RNC or RNSEC, the transaction would be legal. How could anyone conspire to do indirectly what could legally have been done directly?

Just to put this $190,000 deal into perspective and demonstrate the petty, vindictive nature of this partisan investigation, the study also reveals that Democrats transferred a total of approximately $11 million dollars in soft money from its national parties to fund Texas campaigns in 2002, compared to $5.2 million transferred by Republicans.