Thursday, August 24, 2006

Greg Abbott Betrays Texans Again

As reported by Terrence Stuts of the Dallas Morning News, Abbott sent armed men to take evidence from a federal court's evidence locker and then Abbott proceeded to lose this important evidence:
A federal judge has ordered Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott to explain why his office seized thousands of X-rays that are evidence in a federal investigation ... U.S. District Judge Janis Graham Jack also wants to know why an estimated 152 of the X-rays disappeared before the attorney general returned 40 boxes of records to a federal depository in response to an order from her. Judge Jack has ordered Mr. Abbott's office to account for all the records that were seized by the attorney general in late June, including who in the state agency had access to the X-rays.

"The arrogance of taking those documents from a federal court-supervised depository is astounding," the federal judge said in a hearing on the matter earlier this month. "The attorney general has exhibited a total disregard for the rule of law by doing this."...

David Van Os, the Democratic nominee for attorney general challenging Mr. Abbott this year, said the records dispute is a very serious matter. He noted that armed agents for the attorney general threatened the depository supervisor with arrest if he didn't turn over the records.

"Greg Abbott is a lawyer and officer of the courts," Mr. Van Os said. "Seizing court records from the court's storage facility without consulting the presiding judge demonstrated a shocking level of arrogance and disrespect."...

Thursday, August 03, 2006

The Fifth Circuit Rejects Greg Abbott's Betrayal

The Fifth Circuit just issued an opinion rejecting the Texas Republican Party's effort to steal the voters' right to select a congressional candidate through the primary system. The appellate court held that:

"There is evidence that Benkiser did not act reasonably and with political neutrality when she declared DeLay ineligible. Indeed, the district court’s description of the events surrounding the letter sent by DeLay imply, at the very least, a lack of neutrality."

In the context of this holding by an appeals court dominated by Republicans, we must ask WHY DID GREG ABBOTT'S ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE FILE A BRIEF IN FAVOR OF AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL ACTION WHICH WAS POLITICALLY MOTIVATED?

The Fifth Circuit went on to hold that

"we fail to see how removing DeLay from the ballot would protect the voters, inasmuch as it was the voters themselves who selected DeLay as the Republican candidate for the general election."

In light of this holding, we must ask WHY DID GREG ABBOTT'S ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE FILE A BRIEF IN FAVOR OF AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL ACTION WHICH WOULD NOT PROTECT THE VOTERS OF TEXAS?

There can be only one answer to these questions.

Greg Abbott places his own political interests and the special interests of Tom DeLay and the Texas Republican Party above the interests of Texans.