The Democrat judge on Tom Delay's case has been removed from the case. This is a very good development indeed, and I forecasted the reasons why Judge Perkins would not last in this post. The prosecutor went down in flames weakly arguing that there was not "a reasonable doubt" as to Judge Perkins' impartiality.
The young prosecutor (of course, Ronnie Earle didn't argue this loser motion) misses the point, which is: A judge must be free from even the appearance of impartiality. May I modestly suggest that a donor to Moveon.org, yes, the same maker of the anti-Delay T-shirts, can have his partiality reasonably questioned in this case against Delay. Judge Duncan, who heard the recusal motion, agreed.
This is simply more evidence of the weakness of Earle's case and his own ineptitude. He should not have opposed the defense motion, and he would have then been able to gain a sliver of high ground. Forever overreaching and seeking any advantage possible, he stuck to his guns.
He is going to get his head handed to him. Prepare to enjoy the ride.
Incidentally, I know Judge Bob Perkins (the now-former Delay judge) from way back. He is an old-time Demo, a partisan for sure. He was always nice to me when I covered the courthouse beat as a young reporter, though. Methinks the judge thought I was, ahem, progressive. Now, why would any one assume that a journalist is a liberal? I have no earthly idea.
Here's what I think: I think Judge Perkins probably legitimately thinks/thought he was impartial. This fact should have given him pause, though. The fact that he couldn't see how his Democrat donations and affiliation with Moveon.org appear to the public at large is evidence of a blind spot.
The Delay trial team moves on to victory.