I am inclined to agree that DeLay's judge should recuse himself

[Ian David]

If what they're saying is true-- that the judge donated to MoveOn.org , then I agree he should recuse himself.

So, then:

1) Is what they're saying true?

2) If so, can we/should we join with the righties in calling for the judge to recuse himself?

If we join with them in a united call for fairness, it also allows us to take the high-road and highlight all the instances in which they have-- and will again try to-- avoid living up to this standard themselves.

After all, it's not like the judge went duck-hunting with MoveOn.org !

[Canuckistanian]

1. Why not? A new judge shouldn't make much of a difference

The question is, does Earle have the evidence needed to nail Delay?

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

2. I both agree and disagree.

On one hand, you're right.

However, to me, the precedent has been set. Once we regain power we can start a new standard and work to rebuild fairness, but it should be quite clear we can't achieve that under this regime. And being that this is step one in taking said regime down, we need all options available.

[Justitia]

3. All due respect, you will not find a judge in TX who has not supported

their respective party. These are elected positions.

I wish I could describe for you how virulently partisan the RW is inside the TX judiciary here.

We have VERY FEW dems as judges, and that is by design.

Our TX Supreme Court is 100% Republican, and has been for a long time.

Finding a judge who has no affiliation is impossible here.

Not to mention, I think we are talking about a one-time $200 donation, for a little perspective.

Most TX judges have given BOATLOADS of $$$ to Tom DeLay's various PACs and "causes", not to mention the state and nat'l repub committees.

[Ian David]

10. Wow. That's eye-opening and scary. Thanks!

So, I guess we need to find a judge who meets the following criteria:

1) Is registered as an independent.

2) Has made either NO political donations, or has donated equally to both parties.

Still, I am inclined to at least express a willingness to hold the Republican's hands while we consider shopping for a new judge.

I hear, for example, that the judges in Iraq trying Saddam's case have about three months with nothing to do.

Maybe one of them will be willing to try Tom DeLay until the trial starts or until the insurgents kidnap them.

[skiddlybop]

13. You must be a really rich white man

to think that there should be gentlemen's rules for one side and no rules for the other side.

Have you forgotten that Delay set about to take away the vote from blacks in Texas by redistricting and laundered money illegally to fund the campaign?

You sound like a republican troll who says oh, tut tut, let's not fight the Republicans.

[Ian David]

22. No, I want to find a way to make his tactic backfire

I want to turn this into an opportunity to demonstrate their hypocrisy and corruption, not to bend over and accept it from them.

And for what it's worth, based on what others have posted in this thread since my original message, I have come to realize that I had been even more naive than I had first thought.

I am, after all, wrong 1/12 of the time.

The idiots want to open-up that can of worms, then I say let's open it.

Oh, it's on!

That make sense?

[magnolia]

29. Why not let...

...the prosecutor prosecute...the judge judge and the trial run it's course. If we (dems) start trying to "demonstate" anything, it could back fire in our faces. A crime was committed. That's enough. Let's not get greedy.

If this judge recuses himself, wouldn't that mean in a similiar case a judge who donated to the NRA would also have to recuse himself? I don't know why they would want that precidence since there probably isn't a repub judge in all of TX who hasn't donated to them.

[Ian David]

30. Agreed. n/t

[RaulGroom]

32. This is actually what gives me pause on this issue

If this judge were to recuse on this conflict, wouldn't that mean that any appellate judge who might be involved in the case in the future would have to recuse if he/she had given to Delay?

In other words, might the defense be tucking this away as a chip to use against a recusal request in the event of an appeal?

[yellowcanine]

4. I disagree - if every judge had to recuse themselves because of political

donations we couldn't find judges to try cases. It is not as if the judge went duck hunting with Ronnie Earle.

[npincus]

5. yes, the judge responded to that question at the arraignment today-

he said he had donated to MoveOn in 2004 before the election in support of the Kerry camapaign.

[BR_Parkway]

18. Kerry ran against Delay? What a clear conflict of interest - much worse

than say, Sec of State also being the head guy in OH or FL to re-elect Shrub.

[Zen Democrat]

6. All judges in Texas are political -- they are all ELECTED.

They get and give campaign contributions so it's really nuts for DeLay to take this route.

Yeah, he'd prefer a judge who contributed to Swift Boat Veterans, but, Too Bad Tom, that's the way the cookie crumbles.

[Beetwasher]

7. What If The Next Judge Gave to Republican Orgs?

Would THAT judge have to recuse too?

[melissinha]

8. So what do we know about Judge B.B. Schraub

The REPUBLICAN reappointed by Perry that Perkins is diferring to?

[annabanana]

17. THAT is the question, for sure..

How tied into the machine is Judge BB Schraub?

[Warren Stupidity]

9. This is how we screw ourselves every damn time.

They are not playing fair. They are not playing by the rules. They are looking for every opportunity to kick us in the balls and poke our eyes out. Get a freaking clue.

There is no high road when you are rolling the gutter fighting for your life.

[Ian David]

12. You're right. I probably was being a little naive

Perhaps the idea isn't to actually take the high road, but to instead lead them on a search for the high road for a while.

To sit down with the Repukes and offer them more opportunities to show themselves for the hypocrites that they are.

[Pepper32]

16. Very true

We need to stop apologizing for having a little leverage.

[rodeodance]

21. yeah, sadly-taking the 'high road' goes not get us any points!!1

[fasttense]

11. If a judge who gave contributions to a party can not hear cases

where a defendant is a member of the opposite party than what about the Supremes? Why didn't most of them recuse themselves in the Gore/Bush recount? What about all those federally appointed judges brush has just appointed? This is just a typical maneuver by the repukes. It's ok for repuke judges to make decisions concerning Dems but not vice versa. Don't buy into DeLays political tactics.

[Ian David]

14. Exactly! This gives us a great opportunity to highlight this issue!

The next time I get a speeding ticket, I'm going to use The DeLay Defense and ask the judge to recuse himself if he's a Republican.

[Pepper32]

19. Right, if they had we would not be in this mess now.

...dealing with a selected preznut.

[Seansky]

15. Hey, aren't reps saying right now that Miers' religious belief won't

interfere with her interpretation of the law...

Catch 22: If this is set as a precedent (all judges that have acted in any kind of partisian way must recuse themselves from any potential conflict based on personal views and beliefs, we will have very few judges left) Yet, I don't want Miers in the SCOTUS...tricky.

[rodeodance]

20. it is a difficult situation. On one hand, if he stays-the trial is likely

to be chaotic at best (charges of bias ect).
on the other hand--the rupugs will have one the argument--they say the judge if biased toward Dems and by stepping down it comes across (true or not) as being true.

[Ian David]

23. So, I'm leaning now toward DISCUSSING recusal but not ENDORSING it...

Get up on a soapboax and describe the high-road to those who refuse to travel it.

Can we get a change of venue to someplace like Saipan? For a JURY trial by the ordinary citizens?

The real scandal of Tom DeLay
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/05/09/real.delay/


Salon Newsreal | Tom DeLay, defender of sweatshops
http://www.salon.com/news/1999/02/04news.html

[Irish Mastiff]

24. No Way!!!

You want to let DeLay get his preferred judge? Give me a break! This is why the Democrats keep losing. The Democrats believe in "fighting fair" while the Republicans fight dirty, with every trick in the book.
The judge is a Democrat. No one pulled any strings or played any games to get him assigned to the DeLay case. Why roll over for DeLay? What is the sense of that?
There is only one outcome to "What is mine is mine, what is yours is negotiable".
The Republicans just stated they were surprised that the Democrats stood firm on Social Security, they expected another wimp out.
We can't afford to wimp out to these guys. Don't even think about it.

[Ian David]

25. People here are good at getting me to change my mind about things

Still, I'm glad that they've handed us this opportunity to show them for the hypocrites that they are.

[Jacobin]

26. Yes. By all means. Repukes can only be judged by repukes

Because we all know that only democrats should be convicted of violating the law. Gawd fearing republicans who make a 'miss step' should not be tried by a court and a good republican judge will see to that.

[windbreeze]

27. Absolutely NOT!!

If Delay wants to travel that route, then let him explain why this is any different, than the SC who was majority R..getting to decide who won the election in 2000...All's fair in love and war...and this is war, make NO mistake about it..
windbreeze

[vickie]

28. I'd like to see a new judge, as well, but I'd like the trial to remain in

Travis County. The trial should take place where the crime was committed.

[warrens]

31. If Sentelle had recused himself in the Starr case, you might have a point

He is, after all, a member of the Federalist Society, a close friend of Clinton-hating pig farmer Lauch Faircloth, and a right wing kook.

[enough already]

33. No way

Having him recuse himself is a tacit admission that moveon is somehow a bad thing. It's not. Fuck Delay, let him deal with the current justice system.

[tabasco]

34. We don't have a one-party state.

It is not illegal, YET, to be Democratic.

Please get your head out of your ass.

A judge does not have to recuse himself because he is in a different political party than the defendant.

[Vinca]

35. I totally disagree.

Hasn't the Republican song and dance over Supreme Court nominees focused on judges being capable of independence from religion, party or any other influences? The fact this judge is a Democrat shouldn't disqualify him from sitting on the case. On the other hand, using the same facts, if a Republican judge replaced him and Hot Tub Tommy landed in the clink, the victory would be even sweeter.