Monday, August 21, 2006

Wallace, Benkiser, and a little thing called bribery....



A week ago, David Wallace could not be stopped. After all, he couldn't stand by and watch the GOP trample on Democracy. He decried the annoiting of Shelley Gibbs as "the way they do things in Moscow." He told ABC 13 that it was "undemocratic to let about 100 precinct chairs decide the GOP's preferred write-in candidate." And to top it all off, David "has a database of voters across the district." But today Wallace withdrew from the race. My theory - He has a database, but no laser.

That must be the reason. Because otherwise, we have just witnessed something very illegal.

There's this little case called Kaisner v. State (772 S.W.2d 528)......In Kaisner, a County Sheriff offered a deputy job to a political opponent in exchange for withdrawing from a run-off. This was found to be a violation of Penal Code ยง 36.01, which is a bribery statute. From the opinion:





Wallace was almost certainly promised SOMETHING directly. But that doesn't even matter. A benefit made to a third party is still bribery. Benkiser's promise of $3,000,000 for the GOP campaign was an illegal pecuniary benefit bestowed on a third party (the local GOP) in which Wallace is a member with substantial interest. From P.C. 36.01:




So no, it has to be the lasers. Because otherwise, some people need to go to freakin' jail.


State GOP chair Tina Benkiser, who
has a history of ignoring Texas law.
Perhaps a year or two in TDC would
enlighten her...



BTW, on the subject of lasers and what not: I remember several months ago I pondered the state of affairs in the local GOP's hide-out, which I theorized was undoubtedly carved into the interior of a volcano. Well, I was wrong. The GOP has no headquarters. Which is understandable - How are you going to get this pack of infighting jackals into the same room without bloodshed?

But now they plan on opening one up real soon...$3,000,000 can buy quite a few lasers, but I'm sure they'll just spend it all on glossy mailers of dudes making out and immigrants stealing your I-Pod. And all you homo/xeonophobes can all thank David Wallace, who happily took a bribe for the team...

Except that nobody actually believes this $3 million promise is true. Which raises the question: Is it bribery if you never intend to pay up? Mark it on your scorecards: The answer is yes. From American Jurisprudence:

Where a corrupt agreement is the essence of the offense, it is immaterial whether anything is actually done in furtherance of the agreement.



UPDATE:

Our friend Juanita thinks that Wallace "may not have crossed the line of Kaisner v. State, but he sure edged up close enough for some stench to get on him." Wrong, honey-chile. With a conditional promise by Benkiser of $3,000,000 towards securing the goals of an organization of which Wallace is a member and has substantial interest, they didn't just cross the line - They launched themselves over it with a howitzer.

6 Comments:

Anonymous Sugar Babe FOR REAL said...

DEEP DOWNSIDE: You'd have to get Republican-bought DA John Healey to prosecute.

Diamond Dave is Healey's good friend. You don't need laws when you have the DA in your pocket.

1:04 PM  
Anonymous i love ronnie said...

otoh, maybe fort bend repubs can keep roonie earle busy a while longer. waalce is an elected official. doesn't that make it OFFICIAL bribery?

1:36 PM  
Blogger Mark said...

Yes, 31.06 pertains ONLY to public servants. In Kaisner, the defendant was a public servant by virtue of being a primary candidate.

Wallace was not a primary candidate, but he is a mayor, and falls under the umbrella of 31.06.

1:39 PM  
Anonymous i love ronnie said...

then the question has to be - did wallace indicate there was a quid pro quo on purpose? is he still trying to screw the process? surely the gop lawyers warned him about this - that is why the 3 million was only mentioned behind closed doors. i think wallace knew exactly what he was doing today. he even put it in writing i hear.

2:00 PM  
Blogger Hal said...

In a criminal investigation, you usually need an MO. In this case, the MO keeps playing itself over and over again, whether it is declaring a congressional candidate ineligible, email eavesdropping, or holding foreign nationals indefinitely in military prison.

Ignore the law, flout the law, and downright disobey the law saying it's right to do so.

Republicans are certainly having issues with the rule of law these days.

3:50 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

ups sorry delete plz [url=http://duhum.com].[/url]

9:58 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home