They say a prosecutor could indict a ham sandwich if he wanted to, but indict it twice? Maybe a turkey sandwich, but not a ham sandwich.
Now that there is a second indictment of Tom Delay (with a real charge – money laundering!) we can only assume he’s guilty. It’s time for Delay to prepare for a shootout with police – his only chance to gain back some respect from fellow Republicans.
BTW, if a ham sandwich was suspected to be lunch for someone who was money laundering, would that be enough to indict it for conspiracy to launder money? It’s not that there’s a ham sandwich I want indicted; I’m just curious.
So ehat is wrong with laundering money? Everyone knows that money is full of germs. Who doesn’t launder their money?
Oops, supposed to be: So what is wrong . . .
If all the money that has ever been “laundered” by political parties in the United States of America, was piled up end to end, it would go to the moon and back and have enough left over to pay off the national debt.
I imagine he’d be able to make it a hat trick and go for a third indictment if this one falls apart… anything to get that pic of DeLay in handcuffs. Even if charges are dropped, every headline or article will feature the phrase “… Tom DeLay (R) Texas (indicted for bla bla bla)…” just as every article about the space shuttle always had the blurb about Columbia in it
Pomoze Bog.
Ham sandwiches are never indicted for money-laundering, for we all know that such activity is perpetrated by the World Zionist Conspiracy, and ham for lunch is not an option. 😉
Yup! All of us know that ham sandwiches are never indicted for money-laundering.
“If all the money laundered in American political campaigns … yadda yadda.”
So “everybody does it” is a good excuse now? Who knew?