The prosecutor invoked the Simpsons to explain what the case was about:
In Cobb's [hypothetical]example, Mr. Burns, the evil billionaire on the show, illegally gives money to politicians so he can expand his nuclear power plant.
Cobb, an African American, complained to the Judge that DeGuerin struck too many African-Americans from the panel. DeGuerin responded that three of those he struck had given him dirty looks after he objected to statements by the prosecutor.
Visiting Judge Pat Priest settled the argument by striking another juror and seating a black woman who had laughed and joked with DeGuerin when he had questioned her.
Only one juror said he couldn't be fair because DeLay was a Republican. A few only recognized DeLay from his Dancing With the Stars days.
Three women said they only recognized DeLay from his recent appearance on the television show Dancing With the Stars. One said he should not have appeared on the program because "he is a bad dancer."
DeGuerin's concern was whether predominantly Democratic Travis County could be fair to Tom DeLay:
DeGuerin said he grew up in Austin and knows "it is the most political town in Texas, if not the United States."
After a spat between the lawyers over comments Cobb made about the severed co-defendants,
One of the potential jurors turned to another and said, "They've already got the gloves off."
The issues seem pretty straight-forward. The state says DeLay engaged in money laundering and the defense says what he did is not a crime:
DeLay and two associates, Jim Ellis and John Colyandro, raised $190,000 in corporate money that could not be used in candidate elections and traded it with the Republican National Committee for a like amount of money for 11 Texas Republican candidates.
Travis County prosecutors say it amounted to money laundering, but DeGuerin contends it was a legal transaction because the prohibited money and the individual money never were commingled. He contends that the Texas code defines laundered money only as money gained as the "proceeds of criminal activity", and that misuse of corporate donations, even if proven, cannot amount to money laundering.
What got so many Democrats in Texas riled up: The money raised by Texans for a Republican Majority (created by DeLay) was traded to the Republican National Committee to help Texas House Republicans in the 2002 election. Republicans won the majority in the Texas House that year, which gave them control of both houses, and the next year they proceeded to redistrict parts of the state to favor Republicans. Tom DeLay was instrumental in drafting the plan for the new districts and pushing it through the state legislature. With the new districts in place, Republicans retained control in the 2004 elections. The Demcocrats said the plan amounted the gerrymandering. The U.S. Supreme Court upheld most of the plan.
DeLay was initially also charged with conspiracy to violate election laws but that count was dismissed by the Judge during the pre-trial motions phase. That leaves one charge of money laundering and one charge of conspiracy to commit money laundering.
The principal issue (as I understand it) is: Texas law prohibits corporate contributions in state legislative races. Did DeLay commit the crime of money laundering by having TRMPAC raise corporate funds, and then instead of providing the money directly to Republican candidates, which clearly wasn't allowed, directing the money to go to the Republican National Committee, which then gave the money to the candidates?
Sounds pretty hyper-technical to me, from a legal standpoint. From a political standpoint, it sounds like sleazy, dirty politics, and if I were a Texas Democrat, I'd be very angry.
