Ronnie Earle: "Oops!"

If you're going to prosecute someone, is it too much to ask that you know the law under which you plan to prosecute? Or is a witch hunt too good to let trivialities like the law get in the way? From Drudge:

The AUSTIN AMERICAN-STATESMAN reports, Travis County prosecutors rushed Monday to fix problems with an indictment against DeLay by charging him "with the first-degree felony of money laundering.

Last week a Travis County grand jury ended its term by indicting DeLay on a charge that accused him of conspiring to violate state campaign finance laws. The problem with that indictment, according to DeLay's lawyers, was that the conspiracy law did not apply to the election code in 2002.

The Texas Legislature changed the law, which went into effect Sept. 1, 2003. That left Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle and his assistants presenting a complicated case to a group of grand jurors on their first day of meeting. Prosecutors hoped to fix the problem by reindicting DeLay on charges that he conspired to launder corporate money into political donations. In 2002, the conspiracy law applied to money laundering.

Earle was trying to prosecute DeLay on breaking a 2003 law...in 2002? You'd think a prosecutor would be familiar with ex post facto and its lack of constitutionality.

Having been embarassed by his lack of legal knowledge, Earle is compensating for his incompetence by going back to the drawing board for a different charge. Better luck with this charge, Earle.

For those of you who don't read very well, let me say this as plainly as I can: I do not like Tom DeLay because of his arrogance, heavy-handedness, and power-drunken attitude. However, any objective person does have to at least question the motives of those who are prosecuting him.

If he's guilty, he'll pay. If he's not, he won't. It doesn't get more obvious than that, now does it?