Edwin Buckham paid Christine DeLay

The Hill reports that former Rep. Tom DeLay had a temper tantrum disguised as a press conference:

DeLay said the evidence shows that his wife did not accept improper payments: “She did her work and she was underpaid for the work she did and they can’t make the case. It’s a Justice Department that is running amok. Fish or cut bait. Do something.”

"Fish or cut bait". You know, I never heard that term until I was in my twenties. I guess it just wasn't used often where I grew up in the northern half of Michigan's LP. But someone else used that term recently, too. Last week, Rep. John Doolittle (R-CA) called upon the FBI and Justice Department to "Fish or cut bait". For what it's worth, prosecutors are looking into suspicious payments by Edwin Buckham to the wives of both Doolittle and DeLay.

The similar behavior of DeLay and Doolittle also corroborate my speculation that DeLay's records have been raided. Why else is DeLay so angry?

As to the substance of the Hill article, we have this:

The inquiry appears to be focused on determining whether DeLay’s wife, Christine, earned her pay from two organizations controlled by Ed Buckham, a lobbyist once closely affiliated with the former Republican leader, according to sources interviewed by federal investigators. Several former employees of the groups have received subpoenas for documents, some in the past few weeks.

. . .

One source familiar with the investigation said federal officials have given immunity to at least one senior member of DeLay’s political circle who may now be cooperating with investigators. Former associates of the majority leader say investigators are apparently attempting to indict DeLay for corruption by proving that Buckham sought to influence him with unearned payments to his wife.

That DeLay accepted bribes through his wife has been my thesis since the beginning of this blog. But we learn that prosecutors have "given immunity to at least one senior member of DeLay’s political circle who may now be cooperating with investigators". A little over a week ago, I suggested that former DeLay CoS Susan Hirschmann had been given immunity in exchange for testimony.

In an effort to provide balance, The Hill talks to a source friendly to Tom DeLay:

A person still close to DeLay said a wealth of evidence proves Christine played an important role at ARMPAC and deserved her salary.

“There are dozens of people who will demonstrate that Christine DeLay was a central cog in DeLay’s political world and was a, if not the, key adviser of ARMPAC,” said the source. “No major decision affecting DeLay was made without Christine being the protector.”

Christine DeLay approved the content of fundraising letters, her husband’s fundraising schedule, and the hiring of new employees, the source said.

Testimony and memos showing that Christine played an active role at the PAC are likely to be an important part of the DeLays’ defense if they are charged.

Now I'm not suggesting that the ARMPAC payments are not significant, but I have called this focus on ARMPAC to be a little misdirection. The payments that convinced me DeLay was corrupt were the payments from Ed Buckham's Alexander Strategy Group (ASG) to Christine DeLay purportedly as compensation for creating a list of lawmakers' favorite charities. The conservative Weekly Standard magazine couldn't find any evidence that Christine DeLay did any work for ASG.

DeLay and his lawyers have had over a year to substantiate their claim that Christine DeLay was properly compensated for creating a 535 item list. There has been no indication that Team DeLay plans to do so. All we get is this assertion by DeLay from the Hill:

DeLay said the evidence shows that his wife did not accept improper payments: “She did her work and she was underpaid for the work she did and they can’t make the case."

Um. I don't give much weight to the uncorroborated self-serving statements of potential criminal defendants. If it is true, prove it! Maybe DeLay could have Sheila Jackson Lee and Nancy Pelosi testify that Christine DeLay contacted them to find out their favorite charities. Until then, I will stand by my long-standing position that Tom DeLay is undeserving of holding an office of public trust and furthermore that Tom DeLay is simply not a credible witness.

==

Richard Cullen's Comprehension

It is difficult for me to explain these few paragraphs from the Hill article:

DeLay said the evidence shows that his wife did not accept improper payments: “She did her work and she was underpaid for the work she did and they can’t make the case. It’s a Justice Department that is running amok. Fish or cut bait. Do something.”

Speaking after a meeting with former Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) on Capitol Hill, DeLay said, “We have cooperated with everything. We’ve given them everything, including computers; they’ve taken computers that I had here. They’ve gotten everything that’s got anything to do with my life.”

Seeking to deflect DeLay’s wrath away from Justice, his lawyer, Richard Cullen, said his client was exasperated by an unrelated case in which a grand jury indicted him on money laundering charges arising from actions at a Texas fundraising committee.

“When Tom DeLay said that [about Justice], it reflected frustration that many people feel when they are involved in an investigation,” said Cullen. “In Tom’s situation, most of the frustration centers around the Texas case, which is dragging on and on. We are very comfortable that the Justice Department is proceeding properly and expeditiously.

My comprehension abilities indicate to me that Tom DeLay when on a tirade about the federal investigation being conducted by the Department of Justice. Why does DeLay's lawyer, Richard Cullen, say that DeLay's "frustration centers around the Texas case"? DeLay didn't mention the case brought up by Ronnie Earle and merry partisans at all. Even though I don't care for lawyers all that much, I'll give Cullen the benefit of the doubt and suggest that maybe Cullen was distracted and didn't hear what his client said.

This brings me to another point. There is a significant segment of the Republican electorate that wants moral and ethical government. When this wing of the Republican Party withheld support from DeLay in the 2006 election, DeLay knew he was toast and eventually withdrew. Is there a moral and ethical counterpart in the Democratic Party? Why don't any Democrats denounce Ronnie Earle's political prosecution? Is there a single Democrat out there with that kind of moral strength?

==

Missing Person

There's something interesting in both "The Hill" article and my original post about it. Neither one contains the name of Jack Abramoff. Readers of my blog have long been prepared to learn more about Edwin A. Buckham, though.

==

Even Odds

Despite the fact that a Google news search for "Susan Hirschmann" yields no hits as of 6:30 p.m. CDT on May 9, 2007, I am getting a slew of hits from people searching that term. Based on the quality of those hits, I'm offering even odds that Susan Hirschmann is our DeLay aide who has received immunity and is cooperating.

==

FBI Director Responds to DeLay

Link

“In each case, I’m comfortable that we’ve taken the steps that are appropriate in the course of the investigation,” [FBI Director Robert Mueller] said.

“Every investigation we do, we follow whatever leads, whatever pieces of information that will take us to a just resolution of the case,” he said, adding that, after counterterrorism, public corruption has been the FBI’s No. 1 criminal priority.

“It’s important to democracy that democracy be exercised without being waylaid by those who engage in public corruption,” he said.

Emphasis Mine

I'd like to second Mr. Mueller's motion.