THE PLOT AGAINST TOM DeLAY: What Did Shadow Party Operative Robert Borosage Know, and When Did He Know It?
|
by Richard Poe Thursday, September 29, 2005 2:55 pm Eastern Time |
Archives 173 Comments |
We all know that Tom DeLay is being framed (and, if you don’t know, you can start your remedial education by reading this post by NRO blogger Stephen Spruiell and this one by Captain Ed; you can also bone up on crooked prosecutor Ronnie Earle in this Wall Street Journal editorial).
What we need to find out now is how the Democrats managed to pull it off and who did the dirty work behind the scenes. Framing a national political leader is risky business. A lot of bribes, threats and hush money need to be spread around. May I suggest that we begin our investigation with one Robert L. Borosage, who is co-director of something called the Campaign for America’s Future (CAF)?
In the November 29, 2004 issue of the Marxist journal The Nation, Borosage co-wrote an article with Nation editor Katrina Vanden Heuvel. They wrote:
“[P]rogressives drive this party now – we provide the energy, the organizers, the ground forces, the ideas, and much of the money. We should organize the opposition [against Republicans]. Progressives should mount a powerful assault on Republican boss Tom DeLay.“
A hard-left militant during the ’60s and a graduate of Yale Law School – where he served as a political mentor to young Hillary Rodham – Borosage subsequently headed the National Lawyers Guild, a radical organization that began in the 1930s as a Soviet front, operated in conjunction with the Communist Party and to this day basks comfortably and proudly in its Communist heritage. Later Borosage headed the Institute for Policy Studies, a far left Washington think tank that has enjoyed close and unsavory involvements with Soviet and Cuban intelligence operations.
Borosage currently serves as co-director of the Campaign for America’s Future (CAF) – a leftwing activist group founded in 1996, whose list of advisors includes Sixties radical Tom Hayden; former SDS president Todd Gitlin; former SDS radical Heather Booth; NOW founder Betty Friedan; Jesse Jackson and social scientist and activist Frances Fox Piven, a founder of the “welfare rights movement” of the late ’60s and early ’70s whose strategy of deliberately overloading welfare rolls to break the “system” actually bankrupted New York City.
When Borosage wrote in November of last year that “progressives” needed to “mount a powerful assault on Republican boss Tom DeLay,” was he just blowing hot air or was he revealing knowledge of an actual plan, formulated by people wealthy and powerful enough to pull it off?
For more background on this question, see my FrontPage article of April 11, 2005, “Soros Shadow Party Stalks DeLay.”
by Richard Poe
September 29, 2005 02:55 PM ET
Cross-posted from MoonbatCentral.com 09.29.05
Comments
173 Responses to “THE PLOT AGAINST TOM DeLAY: What Did Shadow Party Operative Robert Borosage Know, and When Did He Know It?”Trackbacks
Check out what others are saying about this post...I like leftie trolls, particularly the faux-intelligentsia versions. They make amusing sounds when one grinds their insipid notions into the floor. It’s rather like stepping on plastic bubble wrap; fun, satisfying and noisy.
Dissenter writes: “If I am no longer a Republican, it is because, as Ronald Reagan whimsically put it, `the Party left me.’ Think of me as being somewhat along the lines of a Christie Todd Whitman. `It’s my Party, too.'”
Dear Dissenter:
My memory fails me. At what point in the history of the Republican Party was it customary to hurl such terms as “rightwing fascists” and “rightards” at people whose opinions were more conservative than one’s own?
Was it during the Ford administration?
Let’s be serious. You were never a Republican. When challenged to do so, you proved unable even to state what Republicans believe.
Dissenter, we have a zero tolerance policy on this blog for imposters – that is, people who pretend to be conservatives (disillusioned or otherwise), when in fact they are not.
We abhor such infiltration tactics for the same reason that the drafters of the Geneva Convention abhorred them.
The Geneva Convention demands humane treatment for legitimate prisoners of war captured in their proper uniforms. Prisoners captured wearing the wrong uniform – that is, the uniform of the other side – have no protection at all under the Geneva Convention.
Why do you suppose that is? Have you ever thought about it?
JB,
It is strictly on an entertainment level, as you suggested, that I have enjoyed the Dissenter character. He’s simply the guy I have, over time, grown to “love to hate”. Maybe I’m in need of some psychotherapy for this pleasure I get from seeing the perpetual bad guy appear in the scene before the cavalry comes charging in to vanquish him again and again.
Or, perhaps I need to drink a little heavier, though I think I do pretty well in that department, too. 😉
Bottoms up!
-MZ
Amazing. I knew I would get booted off the site for rebuking posters for their rabidness. I didn’t expect that my comment would be expunged, with no sign that it had ever been submitted. I’ve never incited such fear and loathing without even trying.
What is your posting policy? I looked around a little and found nothing; you should make it very apparent to new users.
Another Guy asks: “What is your posting policy?”
The specific rule which you violated with your previous post is this:
COME NOT BETWEEN THE NAZGUL AND HIS PREY!
Here’s another rule, with some relevance to your previous post:
THOSE WHO DEFEND TROLLS WILL BE TREATED LIKE TROLLS.
Sorry I never posted those rules before. I just made them up! 😀
Nice capitals. You are a bigger crybaby than Tom. In fact, you are in a league with Bill the Loofah King. Is he your role model? Or is it Rush the Junkie or Sean the Pin-Headed Fatboy?
And the moonbats begin to swarm…Man, they sure do stink, don’t they?
-MZ
i have discovered the best way to scare the carrion out of the low-down, bottom-feeding, satan-spawn is to tell them you love them and you will pray for them – oooooooh!!!
best advice my little, leftwing, kennedy-loving, rush-hating, mother ever told me was, “you’ve got to kill them with kindness – they hate it.” one of those do as i say, not as i do moments.
just so you know, mr. poe, i am not now nor ever will i defend trolls.
Is AnotherGuy really TheSameGuy? This troll business is just so confusing.
Folks, please note that the original topic of this post is the role of Robert L. Borosage in the plot against Tom DeLay.
In a comment train that is now 60 posts long, we have not found a chance even to think about the original subject. All our time and energy has been spent fighting trolls.
This is what happens when we allow trolls on a blog. This is why trolls must be banned the instant they are identified.
I will prove that DeLay sacrifices human babies to Baal when it’s timely.
Uggh… Troll “DoubleD” represents the Communist Party USA. Sorry to have to give him this undeserved attention, but before anyone posts comments with this bum just be aware of who this quisling really is.
-MZ
Madzionist writes: “Uggh… Troll `DoubleD’ represents the Communist Party USA.”
Really! Perhaps he knows Robert Borosage then.
DoubleD? What’s the Party line on the Borosage question?
robert l. borosage is co-director for america’s future. you may see a sliver of his organization’s agenda at:
http://www.ourfuture.org
seems to me, from what little i read he is sleeping with all our enemies. his desire is to bring this country to its knees by dragging every conservative through the mud. will research more as time allows.
Curiouser and curiouser that Dissenter has been unwilling to criticize any of the communist connections to the DeLay witch hunt, and yet he has been defended vociferously by trolls who represent the radical left ever since Richard called him out.
Coincidence?
Dissenter’s silence is as deafening as the communists who so eagerly leap to his defense and who defend DeLay’s prosecution.
-MZ
please stop waiting for the other shoe to drop madz – it will make you crazier than the diss-barred one. get on subject or we’re all going to have to stay after school. they threatened to kick him out yesterday and probably did just that.
nanc writes: “they threatened to kick him [Dissenter] out yesterday and probably did just that.”
Actually, Dissenter has not yet been banned. I am still awaiting his reply.
The grand jury foreman, a lifelong lefty, says, “I won’t say where they work, but there were state employees and federal employees.”
BAHAHAHA! Yea I bet there were lots of Republicans among that pack of lazy union hacks.
This whole thing is a DNC orchestrated farce from the jury selection to the venue, and from the MSM to the Jeffords-style RINOs (like Shay) that are helping them.
It’s even more transparent than Rathergate.
Very interesting -not at all surprising
“Dissenter” has refused to address Mr. Poe’s questions – posed here and is now “blogging” above -at Posting by Keith Thompson @ Friday 30 September 2005, 1:33 pm.
Dissenter – we’re waiting for your answers here (so to speak).
I was on topic, nanc. I was commenting on how the communists are integral to the Delay witch hunt, and noting the similarity of them to our trolls.
-MZ
oh-kay, madz – you’re so cute when you’re mad. if trolls are trolls – then you must be billy goat gruff!
Yes, I admit I am quite adorable. BTW, what is a “Billy Goat Gruff?”
-MZ
Peedoffamerican,
Of course, indictments have to allege all the elements of a crime. It just so happens that a conspiracy indictment does not require much in the way of specifics because it is involvement with a separate crime (successful or attmepted), the elements of which do not have to be included in the indictment. Moreover, you don’t have to allege the exact specifics: that’s what evidence is for… it’s used in something called a trial, where facts are found by a jury.
Also, you seem to be confusing slant with partisan. A partisan puts his party before his principles… sort of like trying to bite the head of anyone who suggests that a leader of a party they agree with might have (in his effort to advance that agreed-with-party on a federal level) tried to get around a set of inconvinent state laws.
I believe in a nation of laws, not men. If Tom “I am the Law” Delay could accept that the people of Texas didn’t want their politics corrupted by corporate and union money, he has no place in government.
oh madze – how old are you? i will date myself and tell you a brief synopsis of who “billy goat gruff” is: he is the one who saved the other goats from the trolls under the bridge – think back to the 50’s and 60’s when this was required reading in first or second grade. it’s a good one from long ago.
FOS trolls, or freedom of speech trolls, generally don’t have comment sections on their own blogs (think Justin Roehm-ando) or don’t have a blog at all.
—
Anyway, on the investigation of the conspiracy to commit judicial fraud against Tom DeLay launched by Richard Poe, what else needs to be said. Tom DeLay is an exterminator. He’s in his element killing bugs.
The Democrats have no hope.
Sorry, nanc, I was born in ’67.
-MZ
don’t be sorry madze – ’67 was a very good year for pogo sticks and skateboards!
do you still have your pink hula hoop nanc?
Sharikov writes: “`Dissenter’ has refused to address Mr. Poe’s questions posed here and is now `blogging’ above, at `Posting by Keith Thompson @ Friday 30 September 2005, 1:33 pm.'”
So, when all is said and done, Dissenter chooses to go out with a whimper rather than a bang.
Farewell, Dissenter. You are banned.
publius – it was properly called, i believe, a shoop-shoop hula hoop. no i do not although my waistline could use it!
{212 says:
Moreover, you don’t have to allege the exact specifics: that’s what evidence is for… it’s used in something called a trial
Also, you seem to be confusing slant with partisan. A partisan puts his party before his principles…}
Yes the exact specifics must be alleged, this allows the defense to challenge the specifics during the arraignment for bail to be set and for pre-trial dismissal of all charges. This also allows the presiding judge to determine a fair bail amount or to release the defendant on personal recognizance.
No I am not confusing partisan and slant, as I explained b4, Ronnie Earl is a liberal, that is his party. During his tenure, b4 repub’s began to acquire power in the state, primary’s basically subbed for the general election. This was due to the fact that the dem primary actually elected the winner because there was no opponent in the general election. The choices you had in the primaries were between libs, mods, and conservatives. Note that most of the moderates and conservatives switched to the republican party once it began to gain prominence in the state. Ronnie Earl has always been known to go after his ideological (read party) enemies.
The democratic party in Texas actualy consisted of parties within a party, with the lib and left mods becoming todays dems, and the conservative and right mods becoming todays republican party.
having worked in the criminal justice system, it is my consensus that conspiracy is more difficult to prove than murder with an eyewitness. the intent must be there in order for this charge to stick.
For more on Robert Borosage go to our friends at newsmax.com. They give us some more insight who this guy is.
http://newsmax.com/archives/articles/2005/4/7/12314.shtml
Peedoffamerican,
Liberals are a party, a real, honest-to-goodness political party. The DA isn’t in that party; he’s a Democrat, another real honest-to-goodness party. Strengthening a party’s numbers has procedural advantages that have nothing to do with how members vote on substantive issues. Going after party members does not help a partisan.
Note, it was a (successful) effort to acquire and manipulate those advantage that got Delay in trouble. That being said, Trent just brought the Texas US House seats into roughly proper proportion with Texas population; I don’t really have a problem with that. It’s circumventing state campaign finance laws along the way that’s the problem.
Have you seen what can pass for a sufficient conspiracy indictment: it’s soaked in “on or about”s. And for white collar cases, the prosecution can allege willful blindness in place of actual knowledge… talk about vagueness in the instrument! The willful blindness option also makes conspiracy easier to charge in white collar cases than, say, conspiracy to commit murder. (The instruction on willful blindness are often taken by juries to be a negligence standard, though in fairness, they are properly more similar to recklessness or wanton disregard.)
Nanc:
Working in a DA’s office, I’d think the name of his PAC itself would indicate an intent, from the origin, to influence Texas state elections, no? Adding getting corporate money in the mix… well, doing it with those “administrative costs” from the national party is a great way to get around the swiss cheese campaign finance bill he personally helped cripple in Congress, but really is illegal under Texas law. (Just as it would be if Dems funneled Union money the same way.)
Now, as for remedies, you can’t really go back and toss out the guys he got elected, but you can hold the accountble for his part in setting up the infrastructure that made it all possible, even if he designed it specifically to create plausable deniability for himself.
Delusional 212 says:
(Just as it would be if Dems funneled Union money the same way.)
Liberals are a party, a real, honest-to-goodness political party. The DA isn’t in that party; he’s a Democrat…}
Again you fail to comprehend the facts…. The DA is a member of the now LIBERAL Democrat party. The conservative dems he went after have left and most of them have become republicans. As I stated the Democratic Party in Texas up to and after the election of Reagan (and still does in other parts of Texas and the USA) consisted of a party within a party.
For a test, name 10 conservative Dems that are prominent in politics now. (you cannot use Sam Nunn or Zell Miller, they have both denounced the current Lib dominated party)
I can name ten liberal GOP members, but we are trying to get rid of them and call them RINOS.
Here is a helpful list of LIBERAL Democratic Senators:
Akaka, Daniel- (D – HI)
Baucus, Max- (D – MT)
Bayh, Evan- (D – IN)
Biden, Joseph- (D – DE)
Bingaman, Jeff- (D – NM)
Boxer, Barbara- (D – CA)
Byrd, Robert- (D – WV)
Cantwell, Maria- (D – WA)
Carper, Thomas- (D – DE)
Clinton, Hillary- (D – NY)
Conrad, Kent- (D – ND)
Corzine, Jon- (D – NJ)
Dayton, Mark- (D – MN)
Dodd, Christopher- (D – CT)
Dorgan, Byron- (D – ND)
Durbin, Richard- (D – IL)
Feingold, Russell- (D – WI)
Feinstein, Dianne- (D – CA)
Harkin, Tom- (D – IA)
Inouye, Daniel- (D – HI)
Johnson, Tim- (D – SD)
Kennedy, Edward- (D – MA)
Kerry, John- (D – MA)
Kohl, Herb- (D – WI)
Landrieu, Mary- (D – LA)
Lautenberg, Frank- (D – NJ)
Leahy, Patrick- (D – VT)
Levin, Carl- (D – MI)- (D – AR) Class III
355 DIRKSEN SENATE OFFICE
Mikulski, Barbara- (D – MD)
Murray, Patty- (D – WA) – FL)
Nelson, Ben- (D – NE) – IL)
Pryor, Mark- (D – AR)
Reed, Jack- (D – RI)
Reid, Harry- (D – NV)
Rockefeller, John- (D – WV)
Salazar, Ken- (D – CO)
Sarbanes, Paul- (D – MD)
Schumer, Charles- (D – NY)
Stabenow, Debbie- (D – MI)
Wyden, Ron- (D – OR)
My goodness, that list looks like a list of clowns and freaks for the Ringling Bros.-Barnum & Bailey Circus.
par·ti·san1 ( P ) Pronunciation Key (pärt-zn)
n.
A fervent, sometimes militant supporter or proponent of a party, cause, faction, person, or idea.
Notice the definition includes proponent of a cause, faction, or idea—-Now tell me that LIBERAL does not meet that criteria.
I REST MY CASE MORON
212 – we’ll see who has the first and last laugh – har-har-har!
Hey nanc,
Let’s really drive the LIBS crazy!
Tom Delay for President in 2008
That oughta do it!
Libs say:
Slobber, slobber, slobber
foam, foam, foam at the mouth
bark, bark, bark at the moon
arrrrrrrooooooooooooorrrrrrrrr!
nanc, the democ-rats knew the chances of convicting DeLay were not good, but they knew the Republicans had the rule which forces DeLay to step down from his leadership position until he has cleared himself. The democ-rats are extremely frustrated at not being able to win elections and rather than have a self-examination they have decided to fall back on their old standby the courts. Which they have sought to construct in their image. They are so far out of the mainstream they can’t win in the arena of ideas. Most of their “achievments” in the last 20 years have come via the court system. The latest victory, ACLU/Abu Ghraib. Cases still pending, Rove, Frist, DeLay and there will be others. I think you posted a site earlier today that is dedicated to just this sort of thing. Soros is pouring money into the coffers of many of these leftist org’s. What we’re witnessing is the democ-rat party in it’s death throes.
Not a pretty sight.
Publius:
I hope it dies real soon, the stench is becoming unbearable.
By the way Publius, is this where you get your moniker?
The Federalist Papers were a series of articles written under the pen name of Publius by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay. Madison, widely recognized as the Father of the Constitution, would later go on to become President of the United States. Jay would become the first Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court. Hamilton would serve in the Cabinet and become a major force in setting economic policy for the US.
Peedoffamerican,
Do you have any response to the rest of my point, or just the one bit you can drag up a snarky comment about? Because if all you have to support you case is name-calling… well, Nanc is right: we see who gets the last laugh, but I was laughing at your conspiracy theory early enough to claim the first one.
Only problem with Nanc’s view: I don’t take the violation of our country’s laws as a laughing matter. Is that what the Republican echo chamber stands for these days? How low we have fallen. I see no small goverment, fiscal responsibility, or adequate support for the military at all. What I do see is press releases, photo ops, pandering to the pro-lifers (possibly never-to-materialize), and sweetheart, no-bid, cost-plus contracts for services that are performed poorly, if at all.
Are these guys really Republicans? Would a real Republican ever out a CIA operative? What have we been doing these last few years?
And I take offense to the RINO label: just because we didn’t abandon our principles (fiscal responsibility, strong criminal justice, appropriate military support) as soon as unified government picked up an (R) after its name does not make us “in name only.” Maybe being robbed blind lets you following that way?
Do you forget that the EPA was founded by Republicans? Does it make me less of a Republican because I want to pass down that legacy, and potable drinking water, to my children? Should I be purged because I think mercury should be treated as a hasardous chemical? Stalin purged his party too. Those tactics aren’t going to save our party or our country from the blowback we’re brewing in the name of holding onto power in the near-term.
And I’m damn sure privitizing our military won’t either.
Delusional 212 (RINO/dems in drag). Read this:
Here another one:
Furthermore RINO 212 1/2:
A good DA can get a grand jury to indict a turnip. Why did it take him 7 times? The first 6 wouldn’t go along with him. It was only after he managed to pack the 7th with his own cronies that an indictment was finally issued.
212 degrees, I do think you are boiling over! You are as full of it as a Christmas turkey! The E.P.A. has done more harm than good. And it was placed into law by RINO’S and commie liberals! These Gaia worshippers place more importance on grass shrimp than they do on humanity! Athiests, all of you. All you “chicken littles’ should be purged from the Republican party! You subscribe to junk science like global warming too, huh? Even though signs point to the fact that we may be intering into another ice age! Your pc drivel makes me sick.
PC 212 degrees boiling, see, you caused me to get off topic with your baloney! We were talking about the demo-rats and rinos trying to railroad Tom Delay! You’ve boiled over pal! Tom will win!