The Mayor is the "Decider" When it Comes to the Law

Wow -  Mayor Cook is proving himself to be quite inept at navigating the political waters these days.  His latest request for an injunction has only infuriated more El Pasoans who are fed up with his disregard for the "will of the people."  Of course, you can't blame the guy - he knows he can't withstand a recall election and will thus be ending his mayoral service sometime next year. 

I kind of feel for the guy because he was hoping against all hope that the gay benefits issue would be solved in the courts.  At that point he hadn't gone against the "will of the people" and he had in his pocket a weapon of mass diversion - plausible deniability.  Had the court resolved the issue in favor of the gays, he could have blamed the court.  Instead, the court said - in many more words - you (the city )interpreted the ballot initiative they way you wanted to interpret it, now you have to stand by that.  The court also made it clear that they could have interpreted the measure differently and just limited the ban on benefits to the gay and unmarried - the City Attorney's office chose not to and held retirees hostage in an attempt to secure public favor for giving benefits to gays.  If you do remember the original rhetoric, the number of people losing benefits from the city's interpretation of the ballot initiative was in the thousands.  As of right now, the number is in the hundreds.  Who isn't telling the truth?  It's usually the guy whose story changes frequently.

So - after the court made its decision the Mayor was in a bad spot.  His goal in life is to be mayor for life (huh? I write terribly).  He badly wanted council to support putting together a charter amendment election so that he could remove term limits for elected city officials, if not just for the mayor.  In order to get the progressives on council (the majority voting block - sometimes) he decided to throw them a bone and break the tie toward ignoring the "voter's will" on the ballot initiative.  It was a political move he hoped would spur them into action on his behalf with the charter amendment election.  He guessed wrong.  He also didn't guess that the Jesus freaks would get more organized and recall him and other council members.  He also didn't understand that many El Pasoans, even ones who don't mind if the gays have benefits, saw his move as disfranchising voters and they were hopping mad at his move.  Their attitude was "a vote is a vote and if it doesn't turn out your way - too bad!"  After all, conservative voters in El Paso haven't had a vote go their way in decades and they take it pretty well. The mayor's actions were seen as a "chicken shit move," as one of my neighbors put it one day while we were discussing the issue and this guy voted against Pastor Brown's initiative!

I'm guessing the mayor found out that not only did Pastor Brown get the signatures, he got enough to recall him twice.  Instead of being a man about it and going out and campaigning for his life, he called in a favor in order to save his hide.  That favor didn't win him any friends out there in El Paso-land given that it made him look like he was stepping on the "will of the people" yet again.  It's going to be hard for him to claim he cares about his constituents after he's tried twice to usurp their authority and succeded once.  The issue is no longer about gay rights, and it hasn't been for a while.  The people who have told me they signed that petition are not people who hate gays - they are people who hate abusive governments.

None of this could have been avoided by any measure to "save" Mayor Cook.  The "No Recall" crowd was misdirected in their actions. They should have been talking to pro-gay benefits candidates about getting in the race when Cook inevitably lost his recall fight.  Instead, they let their members make asses out of themselves on forums, comments sections and in public.  The group is made up of political novices who don't know that it's almost impossible to ask people not to participate in government - it's like begging people not to vote.  They could have let Cook drift off into the sea of ambiguity and gotten started on framing their candidate to run the city and protect their views on gay benefits.  Missed opportunity on their part - they've lost any control of the process past the signature gathering portion of this contest and they failed miserably during that stage if you believe Brown has 11,000 signatures.   The business community will elect the next mayor - not the "No Recall" crowd. 

As for the veracity of the Mayor's complaint - he doesn't have much to go on.  You have to prove more than intent in this case.  The reason Jaime Esparza isn't saying much is because he knows there's no way to bring this forward.  You have to have witnesses to these people breaking the law.  Passing a petition around in church isn't illegal.  Sorry, it just isn't - just like casting a vote in a church isn't illegal.  Besides, Esparza was only used as a factor to intimidate people into not signing the petition - they wanted people to think they'd get investigated for doing so... something they do in border towns all the time.  The bottom line was clear - trying to escape a recall through a technicality that was weak at best, was the first sign something was going very wrong for the mayor here.  Now he has bigger troubles - big public troubles.

Theresa Caballero and Stuart Leeds held a 30 minute press conference yesterday and eviscerated the mayor in front of God and everybody.  They turned this into a "big mean government flexing its muscles against the average Joe" move by Cook and positioned themselves as populists.  Caballero and Leeds bang a loud drum and all the media comes when they hear it.  This whole thing will play out publicly and the mayor isn't going to shine very bright here in this negative light.

Below I'll get into why an injunction in this matter is ridiculous and just about anybody worth their salt in the legal community agrees, but right now I'd like to talk about how the two most powerful attorneys in El Paso are going to make the injunction disappear and do it with a vengeance.

Judge Alvarez was my judge when Leeds sued me.  Judge Alvarez had a hearing on my motion for summary judgement where he made it crystal clear why Leeds had no case against me and why he should dismiss their lawsuit.  However, Alvarez is elected.  Leeds and Caballero are vindictive.  He feared they'd spend the next year of their life talking about how much they hated him and possibly run against him, so he decided to not to issue a summary judgement, but let the thing go to trial where he could dismiss the case at "halftime" and take the wind out of their sails.  As I've noted before - I'm not going to pay $10,000 to prove what we all know is true, and decided to save Alvarez the trouble along with me saving some money by settling.   The lesson here is that Leeds and Caballero will run that court from the second they step into it, to the moment they let everyone know they can leave and the issue has been resolved.

Here's the big BS scary part of this whole deal.

If you're a republican in El Paso looking to get an injunction on your behalf and it has to do with you being elected or not - you best go pound sand.  Here's the fallacy of the entire place called El Paso - a judge calls in a political favor from a political party friend and it wouldn't be done anywhere else except El Paso where these kinds of deals are cut in the broad daylight and nobody seems to care.  Even if you are a democrat, you should be appalled that a judge is interfering with TWO (2, dos, 3-1) investigations - or should I say, intervening on behalf of a guy who asked the investigation be launched.  Basically, the judge has ruled that Mayor Cook is the "decider" when it comes to who is guilty of breaking the law and who isn't.  If the mayor "thinks" you've done something wrong, then he's got a legal arm to have you and what you are doing stopped.  Any of you democrats who believe in freedom and the constitution should be very angry with this move.

And this isn't just little ol' me who thinks this is a very fishy deal for the mayor and the judge. As you know, I was sued by the most powerful and hated attorney in the southwest, as mentioned above.  When that happens, you make a lot of new lawyer buddies quickly.  It seems everybody wants to help you defeat their mortal enemy - or the guy they hate with the rage of thousand drunk sailors.  My email box filled up rather quickly with lawyers writing on the same theme of ----WTF?  The mayor gets injunctions based on his gut feelings?  Jaime Esparza is investigating this along with the Texas Ethics Commission, but Cook is the one with the power to start and stop this process? ----  Of the more than 20 emails I was sent, none of them thought the Judge acted in the right way here.   The other theme was ---- Caballero is going to have a field day with this and embarrass a lot of people in the process.----  Great - like she needs a bigger head.

For those of you from the "No Recall" crowd who are a little too obsessed with yourselves to understand the law - as frequently shown in your comments on the El Paso Times web page - I can put what happened here in simple terms.   What if your vote for mayor was denied by injunction because somebody "thought" someone "might" have broken the law when voting that day?  That would suck wouldn't it - one guy's hunch screwing you out of the privilege of participating in the political process? 

I see things getting really out of hand here quickly.  The "No Recall" crowd would do well to stop their members from calling all people who go to church "bigots" in online forums before they figure out just how many people take an offense to that.  When the majority people who vote go to church - I wouldn't poke them with a stick by making fun of them for it - that's if you want to recruit them to your side at some point.  They also need to remember that no matter what, nobody is going to take gay benefits away - it doesn't matter who they elect.  There's no reason to pick all these fights when you have nothing on the table to lose.  Here again, vanity has replaced common sense.

Comments

[Carl Starr]

Cook's hearing was ex parte, TX allows that...I dont know if David is joking when he says TC and SL are most powerful west tx attys....I admit when you hire a atty, you hire all their connections at the courthouse but Davids fear talk of powerful attys is overblown, like someone is going to break your legs or deny your access to the courts...sure their is problems in the courts but the last great hope is that it is the courts who 'know no top and no bottom' as Dylan said...David paints a picture of Judges folding etc to 'powerful attys' goes too far...in a legal system based on a versus system....whats powerful is well plead and researched pleading, thats powerful not courthouse politics.

[a fan of your neighbor]

carl, david is right. if they got arditti off, then they are "that good". david, your neighbor hit the nail on the head. "chicken shit move" by cook. i bet cook got the idea from byrd. if you remember byrd sued the people who started the recall on her. i know a few of the recall supporters have been served. most could care less about the gay thing and dont like that their vote was overturned. martyr's like sal gomez will double in size now because of this move by cook. alvarez just made a bunch of enemies also.

[cynical about govt]

Unfortunately Carl I no longer believe that the judicial branch of government is clean in all respects. I think some can be easily influenced by attorney's presenting cases in their courts. Look at the federal courts on the recent Obamacare decisions- if they were appointed by Obama or a former Democrat president, they ruled in his favor; if they were appointed by a Republican they ruled in their favor. So I have come to believe our judicial system in the US is just as corrupt as the other 2 branches of government. Doesn't matter whether the judge was appointed or elected. There are a few GOOD, reputable judges in El Paso (some no longer serving) - but its an extremely small number.

[Carl Starr]

I think there is some corrpution and favoritism etc by the judges in state court [more so than fed court] but my point is, the great hope is that the law is more powerful than corruption, that a well plead lawsuit can beat any powerful atty or paid off judge...this last great hope remains for many reasons but one great one ie the right to appeal.

[Ken]

Carl must be living under a rock! You don't have to be very smart to recognize the connections between the politicians, judges and the decisions coming from the courthouse. They are not all corrupt, but those who make their living at the courthouse know which court they "need" to be in to prevail.

[Carl Starr]

I am not under a rock, I know law enforcement is corrupt as hell due to gaslighting and gangstalking.

And I dont think I am talking about nongov suits, I am talking about civil rights lawsuits beyond due process...I dont know what goes on in divorce and custody and car wreck suits maybe its exactly corrupt as you say but for the great 4th Amendment I refuse to believe that the Bill of Rights was included Constitution but for the accused and the criminal, no its there to protect all Americans from abusive government. I can assure if not say for the public defenders office who are the true champions of liberty then yes corruption would completely take over our courts. But of course civilly I am also talking about the 1st amendment, point is in purely civil rights cases there is less corruption by the courts, thats my hope...besides like I said the right to appeal alone protects aginst some court corruption...the courts are bad sometimes, sometimes i feel like throwing up but when I read the case of a Murderer walking due the 4th Amendment...I have hope that the courts and police will behave...and that we will always be a nation of laws, not of men.

[Gossip Girl]

I am constantly astounded by the level of arrogance shown by Cook, Byrd, Ortega and the rest of that faction. With each succeeding governmental issue they take on, the arrogance is taken up a notch. They really, really , really rely on the ignorance and the short memory of the electorate.

[Texaswoman]

The original election was illegal and a fraud and all that flows from it is illegal.

[Tim Collins]

Texaswoman - can you cite the specific court ruling that supports your position?

[Lupe]

All I know is that it seems that if the voters said "No", then it should stay that way. We are constituents of this USA. It is sad at the same time because it is like David says, its a situation where you are dam if you do and dammed if you don't.

[a fan of your neighbor]

well, all this is no more.

http://www.elpasotimes.com/newupdated/ci_18892961

caballero scared the chit out of alvarez.

[David K]

I swear I don't have a crystal ball or anything of that nature. I just know how El Paso works.

[Old Fart]

This thing is better than a TV novela.

You said it well David K, it was a "chicken shit move."

[Cheney]

I have been totally surprised by the extremes that the Mayor has gone to shove his personal agenda (friends needs) down the voters throat. Then again I have been pleasantly surprised by the continued voice opinions of the constituents who have continued to this day to write a letter and say "oh hell no" and now this recent desperate move and decision made by a Judge who is elected (federal hopes went down in flames) may now be a good enough reason to take note of this particular Judge and vote him out...hopefully a challenger will find him vulnerable.

I have to say that between the corruption charges, prison sentences and pending court trials for the alleged Corrupters that I am seeing a more positive effect in that the old Politicos are being held accountable, and there "shoe in" run again for office is no longer a "sure thing." Even Reyes is running scared...ohhhhh finally the same old faces are not going to be forced upon us due to the fact that they run "unopposed."

Let's look at all the Judges on the bench for more than 10 years and hope that they too can be rotated and removed...by elections that COUNT...

[Texaswoman]

Don't know about you Tim but taking away a groups ability to enter into a contract for health insurance based upon the religious beliefs of another group is wrong. Actually pitting it to a vote makes it Unconstitutional. Now we are going to have a version of Jim Crow laws for gays.

[A. Edward Lewiston]

Texaswoman - You suggested fraud and illegality, if it was so then there will be precedent to back up your case. I agree that this ordinance and other laws throughout the country are de jure separate but equal with regards to the gay community, but other than Prop8, nothing has been presented in courts to fight for gay rights. Until that happens, the gay community will continue to be exploited for political purposes as both groups have done in this particular case.

[a fan of your neighbor]

for the last time would somebody have the guts to put on the agenda to "quit paying any dependent coverage at the city,county, state,federal, schools, and any tax paid government entity ?" this problem goes away and that way i can tell all my bitches i aint covering yo ass cause i's cant's afford it.

texaswoman, its a privilege to have health insurance and not a "right". if one of the requirements is to be married then i say take your ass down to the court house and get married. if your gay then i would hope they would allow civil unions. at least in that respect they could enjoy the benefits of divorce like the rest of us hetero's . david is right in that this issue breeds abuse and fraud as bad as food stamps.

[cynical about govt]

Council doesn't have the guts to abolish providing 70% premium payment for dependent and spouse coverage. It would screw up their budget - they would lose favorable premium treatment with the insurance company. It can be done - but it won't be done because there is no will to do so on city council. They would rather fight these stupid battles with Tom Brown, the courts, etc. than to make a common sense decision that removes the drama from the issue - and actually SAVES the taxpayer money!

[Ghost Writer]

Cook is digging himself a deeper hole.

http://www.elpasotimes.com/newupdated/ci_18901606

[cynical about govt]

Ego driven. Serve 8 years as a NE councilman; not quite 8 years as mayor and possibly get recalled. Big blow to the ego.

[Texaswoman]

Please read 2.401 of the Texas Family Code

[Jazzo]

john is smart but not clever...there is a huge difference due to his keen approach lacking street appeal...what a way to end a political career... A true reflection of El Paso's political participation and lack of tolerance....