Here is the text of the indictment.

DeLay’s statement:

These charges have no basis in the facts or the law. This is just another example of Ronnie Earle misusing his office for partisan vendettas. Despite the clearly political agenda of this prosecutor, Congressman DeLay has cooperated with officials throughout the entire process. Even in the last two weeks, Ronnie Earle himself had acknowledged publicly that Mr. DeLay was not a target of his investigation. However, as with many of Ronnie Earle’s previous partisan investigations, Ronnie Earle refused to let the facts or the law get in the way of his partisan desire to indict a political foe.
This purely political investigation has been marked by illegal grand jury leaks, a fundraising speech by Ronnie Earle for Texas Democrats that inappropriately focused on the investigation, misuse of his office for partisan purposes, and extortion of money for Earle’s pet projects from corporations in exchange for dismissing indictments he brought against them. Ronnie Earle’s previous misuse of his office has resulted in failed prosecutions and we trust his partisan grandstanding will strike out again, as it should.

Ronnie Earle’s 1994 indictment against Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison was quickly dismissed and his charges in the 1980s against former Attorney General Jim Mattox-another political foe of Earle-fell apart at trial.

We regret the people of Texas will once again have their taxpayer dollars wasted on Ronnie Earle’s pursuit of headlines and political paybacks. Ronnie Earle began this investigation in 2002, after the Democrat Party lost the Texas state legislature to Republicans. For three years and through numerous grand juries, Ronnie Earle has tried to manufacture charges against Republicans involved in winning those elections using arcane statutes never before utilized in a case in the state. This indictment is nothing more than prosecutorial retribution by a partisan Democrat.

Rich Lowry and Mark Levin aren’t convinced there’s anything here.

Lowry:

If you can indict a ham sandwich, a conspiracy charge is indicting the mustard on the sandwich; it’s what you do when don’t have anything solid; conspiracy indictments are often tossed.

Levin:

Here’s my first take on this indictment (I’ve only read the indictment and nothing more for now): The indictment is three pages in length. Other than a statement that “one or more” of 3 individuals, including Tom DeLay, entered into an illegal conspiracy, I can’t find a single sentence tying Tom DeLay to a crime. That is, there’s not a single sentence tying DeLay to the contribution. The indictment describes the alleged conduct of two other individuals, but nothing about DeLay. You would think if Ronnie Earle had even a thin reed of testimony linking DeLay to the contribution, it would have been noted in the indictment to justify the grand jury’s action. Moreover, not only is there no information about DeLay committing acts in furtherance of a conspiracy, there’s no information about DeLay entering into a conspiracy. I honestly believe that unless there’s more, this is an egregious abuse of prosecutorial power. It’s a disgrace. I understand that not everything has to be contained in an indictment, but how about something!

Rebecca Harton says that the “politically motivated” argument misses the point.

The investigation probably IS politically motivated. BUT if the charges against him are true, it doesn’t matter to me what motivated the investigation. He’s either guilty or he’s innocent. That’s what really matters

However, maybe she missed the first sentence in his statement:

These charges have no basis in the facts or the law.

“Did Chuck Schumer get my credit report?”

That’s the question that various Senators and Candidates are asking. Michelle Malkin is asking a different question, and it is, “Where is the NYT, the ACLU, etc?”

Captain Ed turns the tables and asks Schumer some of his own questions. Mark Kennedy responds to the scandal (alternatively, Chuckaquiddick or Schumergate) here.

Hugh Hewitt graciously offers the phone number for a good defense attorney.

First, write down this number: 202-974-5600. That’s the number for Chadbourne & Parke in DC, where you can reach Abbe Lowell. LoweFirst, write down this number: 202-974-5600. That’s the number for Chadbourne & Parke in DC, where you can reach Abbe Lowell. Lowell’s a bit busy right now, but he is the city’s best bet for criminal defense and he’ll get you into competent hands within the firm. It is best to be the first one to the firm before conflicts kick in. Bring your wallet. Probably dad’s wallet, if you are young staffer in over your head. In fact, you’d better tell dad right now. It isn’t what he signed you up for, and he’s going to pretty ticked that Schumer’s gotten you into this mess, but it is better to tell him now rather than wait for the storm to pass over.

Pete the Elder:

Remarkably even though his employees have committed a felony they have not been fired, only suspended with pay.

I think this story qualifies as a climate of fear case even though no violence occurred because they were breaking the law in order to go after and possibly intimidate a political opponent.

The Ox Rant points to a Newswire article that quotes Virginia Walden Ford, who is still waiting for an apology:

“There is enough fear about identity theft and government invasion of our privacy without the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee engaging in such activity,” said Virginia Walden Ford, president of People of Color United and DC Parents for School Choice. “Our Senators should assist in protecting and guaranteeing our right to privacy, not condoning such gross violations. I’m disappointed Senator Schumer hasn’t publicly apologized to Lt. Governor Steele. We’re waiting for your apology, Senator Schumer.”