November 2, 2005
DOES THAT MEAN TEXAS DEMS ARE THE 20% MINORITY SUNNIS?
DeLay to get new judge: Next fight will be over site for trial (Laylan Copelin, Austin American-Statesman, 11/02/05)
After letting his assistants handle most of the hearing, Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle, whom DeLay has criticized as conducting a political witch hunt, made the final argument for the state."This is not a political case," argued Earle, a Democrat. "This is a criminal case."
He argued that there is no precedent for disqualifying a judge because he makes political donations, that the testimony on Tuesday reinforced Perkins' reputation as a fair and impartial judge, and that it is common for Texas judges to make political donations. Earle added that Perkins' donations -- $5,255 over about five years -- is a fraction of what DeLay can raise to fight his legal and political battles, including "intimidating the judges he disagrees with."
Earle argued that removing judges under these circumstances could lead to a country split "into Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds."
That's verging into loopy territory even for Ronnie Earle. It might well be time for some of Mr. Earle's closer friends and associates to urge him to think about retirement.
Posted by kevin_whited at November 2, 2005 12:58 PMYou've got to remember that hanging around downtown Austin, with the Bill Burkett types, the Friends of Dan Rather and an area where Lloyd Doggett (waylayed by Phil Gramm in the Senate race 21 years ago) is the local congressman for life, Earle's comments are completely in the mainstream of the people he sees every day. They really think the Republican Yahoos in DeLay's Sugarland, or even nearby Round Rock, are out to factionalize and destroy the country.
Whether or not he's still in the mainstream of Travis County as a whole, given the growth of the suburban areas, remains to be seen, but Ronnie's still got 38 months left in his current term, which is plenty of time for people to forget he's obsessively partisan and incompetent at the same time.
Posted by: John at November 2, 2005 1:31 PM"Earle argued that removing judges under these circumstances could lead to a country split "into Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds."
I wanna be a Sunni.
Posted by: h-man at November 2, 2005 2:12 PMIt's not very common to recuse a judge without some evidence of actual bias against the defendant (by which I mean statements by the judge to the effect that Republicans are crooks, or some such). That makes me think that the removed judge has manifested bias in more ways than just making donations to the Democrats, because if that were enough there would a lot more recused judges. I might have missed something here, but usually a motion is first made to the judge himself to recuse himself, and then appealed if the judge refuses. Here it looks like they brought in an outside judge from the outset. There's a lot going on here in terms of atmospherics.
Posted by: Lisa at November 2, 2005 2:19 PMmr earle reveals more than he realizes, with his analogy. saddam is the father he never had.
Posted by: Sigfried Freud at November 2, 2005 2:32 PMMark my words: this piece of junk of a case won't go to trial.
Posted by: pchuck at November 2, 2005 2:39 PMIt's my understanding that they did ask the judge to remove himself, and he refused, which is when the appeal was made. Of course the judge was correct to not step down, because Leftwing Progressives always see themselves as fair, unbiased and objective while giving those Evil Rightwing Republicans what they deserve..
Posted by: Raoul Ortega at November 2, 2005 2:47 PMPerkins stepped aside when they ran this same scam on Kay Bailey Hutchison.
Posted by: Chris B at November 2, 2005 2:51 PMPerhaps Judge Bob Perkins is Lucy Ramirez. Or George Conn. Or the mystery man in black, at the county fair. Only Bill Burkett knows for sure.
Posted by: ratbert at November 2, 2005 3:37 PMThat makes me think that the removed judge has manifested bias in more ways than just making donations to the Democrats, because if that were enough there would a lot more recused judges.
Well, AIUI, in this case the judge gave money to Moveon.org when they were running their "Let's Get Tom DeLay!" fundraising campaign, but who knows.
Posted by: John Thacker at November 2, 2005 3:50 PMBeing that Molly Ivins used to call the future majority, "Shiite Baptists" that sounds about
right.
