More information about Ronnie Earle's vendetta against Tom DeLay, based in part on reports from members of one of the Travis County grand juries:

A Texas prosecutor tried to convince a grand jury that Representative Tom DeLay gave tacit approval to a series of laundered campaign contributions, and when jurors declined to indict, he became angry, according to two people directly familiar with the proceeding.

The two people interviewed, who commented anonymously because of grand jury secrecy, said Travis County prosecutor Ronnie Earle became visibly angry when the grand jurors last week signed a document declining to indict, known as a ''no bill."

One person said the sole evidence Earle presented was a DeLay interview with the prosecutor, in which DeLay said he was generally aware of activities of his associates. He is charged in an alleged money- laundering scheme to funnel corporate donations to Texas legislative candidates in violation of state law.

The person said that Earle tried to convince the jurors that if DeLay ''didn't say 'Stop it,' he gave his tacit approval."

After the grand jurors declined to go forward, the mood ''was unpleasant," the other person said, describing Earle's reaction.

So there you have it: Earle's "evidence" against DeLay, according to a grand juror who heard it, consisted of DeLay saying that he is "generally aware of activities of his associates," and Earle arguing that he gave "tacit approval" to what was, I think, a perfectly legal arrangement--with no evidence, apparently, that DeLay even knew about it.

Is this the most feeble indictment in the history of law enforcement? It is certainly a contender.