Bye Tom

You'll never be Majority Leader again:

A judge dismissed a conspiracy charge Monday against Rep. Tom DeLay but refused to throw out the far more serious allegations of money-laundering, dashing the congressman's hopes for now of reclaiming his post as House majority leader.

When he was indicted in September, DeLay was required under House rules to relinquish the leadership post he had held since 2003. While Monday's ruling was a partial victory for DeLay, he cannot reclaim his post because he remains under indictment.

The ruling means the case will move toward a trial next year, though other defense objections to the indictments remain to be heard by the judge.

DeLay's side spun this as a victory because they have to. But the fact of the matter is that this makes it impossible for the Hammer to ever get his old job back, regardless of the outcome of the trial. A new permanent Majority Leader will be elected next year, and that guy won't be likely to step aside. And of course, by next November, the possibility remains that the new Majority Leader will be Nancy Pelosi. A possibility all the more distinct given that the culture of corruption has continued to mow down Republicans one by one.

The conspiracy charge was thrown out (on a technicality, or some claim, on a shit ruling), but look at this ridiculous logic DeLay's lawyers used to try and throw out the more serious money laundering charge:

But the judge upheld charges of money laundering and conspiracy to commit money laundering. Those charges involve an alleged attempt by DeLay to conceal the source of the campaign contributions by funneling the money through his own political action committee and then an arm of the Republican National Committee.

In trying to have those charges thrown out, the defense argued that the Texas money laundering law does not apply to funds in the form of a check, just coins or paper money. But the judge said that checks "are clearly funds and can be the subject of money laundering."

The defense attorneys also argued that the definition of money laundering in Texas involves the transfer of criminal proceeds. Because the money in this case was not illegal to begin with, they argued, money laundering never occurred.

But the judge rejected that argument.

Then DeLay's lawyers argued that there was no laundry present, so how could laundering have occurred?

Then they claimed that DeLay never had the necessary amount of quarters to operate the laundry!

Then they went back to third-grade law school and re-read their "I Wanna Be An Attorney" pop-up book.

UPDATE: Check these Gallup poll numbers out; DeLay might have trouble even getting re-elected. DeLay did make his own district less safe in the Texas redistricting scheme, doling out pieces of Republican areas to his buddies in order to get them elected. But a 37% approval rating a year out from a campaign, with a high-profile trial in between? I'm sure he'll throw lots of money at the problem, but it'll be a tough road.