DeLay/GOP: Online Petition delivered to 5th Cir. JUDGES!

[DesEtoiles]

http://www.harriscountygop.com/site/PageServer?pagename=CD22Petition

Harris County GOP online petition telling 5th Cir. Judges they should rule according to the GOP's argument in the DeLay ballot case.

Are you allowed to give a petition to a judge, when you have a matter pending before him?

What about the rules of evidence? Don't the rules decide what facts are before the judge to consider? And the judge decides based on the record (the facts) and the law?

Is the petition to be part of the record? If not, how can it legitimately be considered by the judges in their decision?

[MagickMuffin]

1. Here's the petition

Judges of the 5th Circuit,

Fair and open elections have been the hallmark of our democracy for more than 200 years now. One can only wonder how the residents of Texas Congressional District 22 can have a fair election when one party is attempting to keep their opponent completely off the ballot.

Each day that goes by with Democrats perverting the process and denying the public their choice of candidates is a travesty of justice. This deliberate subversion undermines the will of the people and sets a horrible precedent for future elections.

Therefore, I am urging you to do the following:

1) Remove the injunction against choosing our candidate
2) Declare the Republican ballot position officially vacant
3) Allow the voters of CD 22 a fair choice of candidates

Signed,

I thought they had a candidate on the ballot, and his name is Tom BugBoy the Hammer DeLay. There they go again projecting their delusions about perverting the process by denying the people to choose their candidate:shrug:
As I understand the situation BugBoy didn't want to lose his campaign money that he intended to use for the sole purpose of his legal defense fund, so he kept his name in the race. Then he decided to retire and step down.
So in he is the one responsible for the people not having a candidate.
He's the one who PERVERTED THE PROCESS.

The Democrats didn't make him run for office, that was HIS DECISION, and the people in his district voted for who THEY wanted to represent them(?).

In answer to your question, while I'm no legal scholar it seems very inappropriate behavior. But hey we're talking about the GOP.
In recent years I have heard people writing a judge about a character witness letters, but this seems entirely different.

Calling David Van Os, Calling David Van Os, Can you clarify this for us?

[theredstate]

2. No effect

If you want to get the attention of 5th Circuit and are not part of the case, the way you do it is to file an Amicus (Friend of Court) Brief. It's just a dog and pony show for the traditional media. They must have the 5th Circuit confused with American Idol.

[sonias]

3. Bhwahahaha

"They must have the 5th Circuit confused with American Idol." :rofl::rofl::rofl:

I like ponies and I like dogs though. We need to call their attempts at distraction, "a pond scum and santorum show", to get the proper level of sliminess.

Sonia

[muse]

4. Abbottt is getting involved

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/4057962.html

Just to warn you, there is a hellishly freakish photo of Tom DeLay you will have to endure when you click on that link.

Abbott, the bastard, is going to ask the Fifth Circuit, to over turn Sparks ruling.

[MagickMuffin]

5. Why am I not surprised?

Because this is exactly how they Repubs game the system.

It really is annoying the way they game the system. First with BugBoy refusing to exit before the primary when the voters in the district had a chance to vote for a new candidate. Then BugBoy refusing to stay on the ballot.

All of this could have been handled with respect to the district voters but instead they have caused this abuse of power.
And now we have the Texas AG and the SOS jumping in the fray to game the system yet again. Talk about the Perversion of democracy.

But of course it's the Democrats fault:sarcasm:

[muse]

6. I have no idea why we didn't see this coming

Abbott is an ass.

Here's the progression:

A. DeLay is an ass.
B. Abbott is an ass.
C. The Fifth Circuit Court will kick Tina Benkiser's ass.

[MagickMuffin]

7. I hope you're right about the 5th Circuit

I hope the 5th Circuit kicks everyone's Ass for meddling in their business before they even get the chance to draw their own conclusions.

I guess they're hoping the judges will become "their Activist Judges", it also seems as though they would rather intimidate the judges ruling in their favor.:puke:

[PDittie]

10. I asked Lt. Col Bill Burkett if I could

reprint his letter to Carl Whitmarsh's listserv, and he consented:

Greg Abbott Has Laid Down the Gauntlet

I personally believe that the recent acts of continued collusion of Gregg
Abbott and Tom Delay make certain that the defeat of Mr. Abbott is the FIRST
priority for the Texas Democratic Party and all Texas Democrats this fall.

But this is not just a Texas issue. This is where the National Democratic
Party must weigh in with "jawbone" support and also get some fund raising
assistance working toward the Texas Democratic Candidate - David Van Os.

Now, it's no secret that David and I are close friends. But my feelings of
this nature have always been that the most important seat to gain this fall
was that of the Attorney General. Gregg Abbott has always been the "enabler"
for the Texas GOP and especially DeLay, Perry, Dewhurst, and Craddick. He
has always been the one that gave legal approval through the power of his
office for the Texas leadership to do very illegal and unethical things.

Without that wink and nod lawyer (only continuing the tradition of Alberto
Gonzales during the Bush Administration) there is a major speedbump and
possibly a fighting chance on specific issues within the legislature as well.

Now, if we and the National Democrats aren't willing to fight this issue
after grand juries and judges have spoken, we simply have no right representing
the people at all.

Bill Burkett
Baird

[sonias]

11. I totally agree with Burkett on this

The national party should understand that the AG seat in Texas has been extremely important for the repuke party. Abbott has been their tool to push through their purely partisan power grab. Everything from redistricting, to siding with big business over the people. Abbott is helping the corporations take control over this state. We need a champion for the people and that seat is crucial.

Sonia

[muse]

12. I'm sick of Abbott

I blogged about him this morning:

http://muse-musings.blogspot.com/2006/07/does-this-convince-you-we-need-new.html

In part, here's what the Houston Chronicle said in an editorial about Abbott today, referring to him saying he will file a friend of the court brief with the Fifth Circuit Court in the Tom DeLay case over non-existent constiutional issues:

For the Texas attorney general to use the resources of the state to help his party win a favorable court judgment would be an intolerable conflict of interest. If Abbott does file a brief, it should recognize that Texas law prevents parties from replacing unpopular primary winners such as DeLay with stronger candidates — exactly what the state GOP is trying to do.

[PDittie]

13. That's a prelude to a fall endorsement

Can you imagine what will happen when the Chronicle endorses DVO?

Victory, that's what.

[muse]

14. EXACTLY what I was thinking.

EXACTLY.

Chronicle endorsement, here we come.

Seriously, the Chron MIGHT win me back with that one.

[DesEtoiles]

8. Does this violate the rules against "undue influence"?

http://www.txethics.org/reference_rules.asp?view=conduct&num=3.05

Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct
(Tex. Disciplinary R. Prof. Conduct, (1989) reprinted in Tex. Govt Code Ann., tit. 2, subtit. G, app. (Vernon Supp. 1995)(State Bar Rules art X <[section>]9))

III ADVOCATE

3.05 Maintaining Impartiality of Tribunal

A lawyer shall not:

(a) seek to influence a tribunal concerning a pending matter by means prohibited by law or applicable rules of practice or procedure;

(b) except as otherwise permitted by law and not prohibited by applicable rules of practice or procedure, communicate or cause another to communicate ex parte with a tribunal for the purpose of influencing that entity or person concerning a pending matter other than:

(1) in the course of official proceedings in the cause;

(2) in writing if he promptly delivers a copy of the writing to opposing counsel or the adverse party if he is not represented by a lawyer;

(3) orally upon adequate notice to opposing counsel or to the adverse party if he is not represented by a lawyer.

(c) For purposes of this rule:

(1) Matter has the meanings ascribed by it in Rule l.l0(f) of these Rules;

(2) A matter is pending before a particular tribunal either when that entity has been selected to determine the matter or when it is reasonably foreseeable that that entity will be so selected.

Comment:

Undue Influence

1. Many forms of improper influence upon tribunals are proscribed by criminal law or by applicable rules of practice or procedure. Others are specified in the Texas Code of Judicial Conduct. A lawyer is required to be familiar with, and to avoid contributing to a violation of, all such provisions. See also Rule 3.06.2. In recent years, however, there has been an increase in alternative methods of dispute resolution, such as arbitration, for which the standards governing a lawyers conduct are not as well developed. In such situations, as in more traditional settings, a lawyer should avoid any conduct that is or could reasonably be construed as being intended to corrupt or to unfairly influence the decision-maker.

Ex Parte Contacts

3. Historically, ex parte contacts between a lawyer and a tribunal have been subjected to stringent control because of the potential for abuse such contacts present. For example, Canon 3A(4) of the Texas Code of Judicial Conduct prohibits many ex parte contacts with judicial officials. A lawyer in turn violates Rule 8.04(a)(6) by communicating with such an official in a manner that causes that official to violate Canon 3A(4). This rule maintains that traditional posture towards ex parte communications and extends it to the new settings discussed in paragraph 2 of this Comment.

4. There are certain types of adjudicatory proceedings, however, which have permitted pending issues to be discussed ex parte with a tribunal. Certain classes of zoning questions, for example, are frequently handled in that way. As long as such contacts are not prohibited by law or applicable rules of practice or procedure, and as long as paragraph (a) of this Rule is adhered to, such ex parte contacts will not serve as a basis for discipline.

5. For limitations on the circumstances and the manner in which lawyers may communicate or cause another to communicate with veniremen or jurors, see Rule 3.06.

[muse]

9. Don't know, but the petition is definitely from a lawyer

Jared Woodfill

Robert Talton is his law partner (aka, The Chosen One)