Showing posts with label The 2020 Election. Show all posts
Showing posts with label The 2020 Election. Show all posts

Tuesday, October 13, 2020

Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them*

*All apologies to former Senator and Saturday Night Live alum Al Franken, who wrote a great book with this title.  It just fit so perfectly for the topic of this article that I couldn't resist copying it.  I love Al Franken so if this ever gets back to him, I hope he isn't mad.

So, remember back in June when I wrote this post?

The short-ish version of what it covered was this:

A year or so ago, Kim Ogg used taxpayer money to hire Mark Goldberg as an Assistant District Attorney, a politically connected former City Councilman who Ogg had gone to law school with.  He spent a very brief stint in Misdemeanor before being "promoted" to upper management at the office as a "community outreach committee member."  What this actually means is that Ogg hired somebody with taxpayer funds to prosecute, but then reassigned him to plan events designed to get her reelected.  Not that it will matter to voters, but some of us find that to be really illegal.

As part of his job as a fake prosecutor Community Outreach Committee Member, Goldberg quickly became the Sycophant in Chief and planned great events for his candidate District Attorney.  In late June, an e-mail went out from Ogg to all of her prosecutors telling them that they were looking for "volunteers" to help her royal Oggness out at a political event that was thinly disguised as a "voter registration event." The e-mail stated that Ogg would be speaking and all attendees would be the recipients of a "food giveaway."  The e-mail strongly suggested that those prosecutors who failed to "volunteer" would have it negatively reflected in their evaluations.  Not that it will matter to voters, but some of us find that to be really illegal, too.

A copy of that e-mail ended up in my hands and I tweeted it, noting my thoughts on it.  It got retweeted and eventually picked up some media attention.  Since a public servant demanding that the public servants she supervises perform political tasks for her benefit is illegal and the media was paying attention, Ogg was caught in a bit of an awkward situation.  What is an unscrupulous politician to do?

Well, of course, she had to feed the Sycophant in Chief to the wolves.  

Shortly after the media caught wind of Ogg's illegal orders, dutiful Mark Goldberg sent out an e-mail claiming that the Ogg e-mail had been a mistake-riddled "draft" of an e-mail he, himself,  had written and somehow inadvertently sent from Ogg's e-mail.  Still trying to figure out who they thought would actually buy that bullshit story version of events.  Seriously, I have represented some really dimwitted folks who have come up with FAR better stories than that one to explain themselves when caught redhanded. 

Anyhoo, the Office doubled down on just how mistake-filled the Oggberg e-mail had been when office flak Dane Schiller apparently told Houston Chronicle reporter Samantha Ketterer that Ogg wasn't even scheduled to speak at the event as originally stated.  

So as usual, Kim Ogg and her upper Administration pulled some really dirty stuff, denied they did it, and then waited for the attention to pass -- which it promptly did.

It did, that is, until local defense attorney and former prosecutor Nathan Hennigan decided to hit the District Attorney's Office with a request for Public Information for the e-mails surrounding the event.  Ogg spent the past four months fighting the release of those records to Nathan.  Ultimately, he received some really interesting documents and he was kind enough to share them with me and some other folks.  They are wildly entertaining to read in relation to the Ogg e-mail, the Goldberg retraction, and the apparent message from D.A. Spokesman Schiller.

Let's take a look!

1.  Starting with Goldberg's e-mail that the e-mail was just a draft that was unapproved by Ogg.


2.  Continuing on, with Goldberg's statement that it wasn't supposed to be sent under Ogg's name.


3.  And as to whether or not Ogg was going to speak or not?  The D.A.'s Office said this back then . . . 


But the records indicate . . . 


Why do you even lie about something like that?  It makes no sense.  I guess when lying becomes so second nature to you, you stop paying attention to whether or not you are even benefitting from it any longer.

The sad fact of the matter is that literally not one thing here will matter to voters who will almost certainly re-elect Kim Ogg on November 3rd.  It's not because she's good at her job.  It's just because Harris County is firmly a Democratic county for the time being and the lightning rod that is Donald Trump is not going to help matters much for Republican candidates.

Kim Ogg is terrible at her job, actually.  And she lacks the character to hold the Office.  Mark Goldberg's lying e-mails to the entire office don't speak too highly of his character, either.  And lying to the media about such seemingly inconsequential matters as to whether or not somebody is going to speak to a crowd for five minutes?   What's the point?

For an organization tasked with fighting for truth and justice, the Harris County District Attorney's Office sure doesn't seem to know much about truth.

Friday, October 9, 2020

The 2020 Election -- Early Voting Begins

 With everything going on in the world lately, I have to admit that early voting kind of snuck up on me this year.  I remember hearing something about Governor Greg Abbott adding a week of early voting a few months ago, but then I saw that some of the Right Wing "power brokers" had tried to sue him to stop that from happening.  Apparently, the plan didn't change, and citizens of Texas can begin voting Early Voting on Tuesday, October 13th.   It ends on Friday, October 30th and Election Day is Tuesday, November 3rd.

Regardless of whether you are a Right-leaning voter or a Left-leaning voter, you should anticipate turn out to be tremendous this year.  You should definitely be making plans to vote early and give yourself some padding if your original scheduled plan to vote falls through.  My guess would be that given the new numbers of registered voters (over 200,000 new voters since the 2016 election, I believe), that even traditionally "slow" days during Early Voting could potentially bring long lines and wait times at the polls.

So, now that I've lectured you on your Civic Duty, here are my thoughts on the Election itself.  

This is going to be the first election in Texas that doesn't allow for straight-ticket voting, and in a Presidential Election year, the ballot is long.  As in 2016 and 2018, I expect that Texas will remain a Red State (although not as Red as in years past) and Harris County will be a Deeper Blue than ever.  Although there are some great candidates on both sides of the political spectrum in Harris County, I don't think that the Republicans will have much of a chance of taking back benches or positions even with the long-overdue demise of straight-ticket ballots.

So, here are my thoughts on the candidates involved in our Harris County Criminal Justice World if you would like to actually take the time to consider your independent voting choices.

Harris County District Attorney -- Kim Ogg (D)(I) vs. Mary Nun Huffman (R)

You may have heard me mention the name "Kim Ogg" here on this blog once or twice, and obviously, this is THE race that everyone in our world looks at most closely.  As most of you know, I voted for Kim in 2016.  I agreed with her platforms and her views on how the Criminal Justice System should be evolving and how it should be run.  I still agree with many, if not most, of those views, but Ogg's methods of running her office and putting her platform into place have been nothing short of disastrous.  In all honesty, looking back on the first four years of Ogg's governing, I feel the same level of frustration that Obi-Wan Kenobi had towards Anakin Skywalker when he told him "It was said that you would destroy the Sith, not join them!"

Star Wars analogies aside, Ogg's promises of "progressive" and "evidence-based" prosecution have been nothing short of farcical as she has spent the entirety of her time fighting for headlines rather than fighting for justice.  After wiping out a significant percentage of experienced prosecutors as her first move in office, she's waged war with HPD, judges, her own administration, and her prosecutors all in the name of her own pride.  To be honest, it has been shocking.  

She has sought politically motivated indictments on cases like Arkema when she knew that the criminal laws would never support a conviction.  She's fired or punished respected and experienced prosecutors who have disagreed with her over unstable policies (including her own 1st Assistant).  She's hired political donors to positions they were unqualified to hold and then refused to fire them when they predictably failed at their jobs or broke the law.  She's putting the landmark Michael Morton Act (which required prosecutors to share discovery evidence with defense attorneys) at risk, as she has instituted a policy of withholding evidence if the Defendant just so happens to be a police officer. 

She's been an absolute disaster.

Her opponent, Mary Nan Huffman, is a former prosecutor from Montgomery County and is currently an attorney for the Houston Police Officers' Union.  Her platform is definitely far more conservative than Ogg's.  Those things that have so grossly marred Ogg's first term are things that Huffman has been very clear that she intends to correct.  She has the strong support of the police unions and all Republican groups who are politically active.  

As a defense attorney, I have to say that I'm not in favor of some of Huffman's ideas for how the Office should be run.  That being said, the job of the elected District Attorney isn't to make the Defense Bar happy.  To paraphrase Cormac McCarthy, prosecutors have their side of the street to work, and the Defense Bar has theirs.   Additionally, if Huffman were to cultivate a D.A.'s Office filled with experienced prosecutors who actually knew what they were doing and weren't afraid to do the right thing (as opposed to being terrified of the ego-maniacal fame hound at the top), I think a Huffman office would work out just fine.

And at the end of the day, Huffman isn't a crook.  I'm not sure that I can say the same about Ogg.

My vote:  Mary Nan Huffman

Moving onto the Judicial elections, it is unsurprising to see that there are not many contested races on the ballot after the lopsided Democratic victories of 2016 and 2018.  Very few aspiring Republicans judges wanted to waste the money on a campaign that will very like prove to be futile.

339th District Court -- Jesse McClure (R) vs. Te'iva Bell (D)

Without fail, every election that I've written about since 2008 has had at least one race that gives me ulcers to write about for personal reasons.  This year, the race for the 339th has been that race.  

Judge Jesse McClure was appointed by Governor Greg Abbott to replace Judge Maria T. Jackson when she stepped down to run for higher office.  I've known Judge McClure since his time as a prosecutor, and quite frankly, I think he's great.  He's done a tremendous job during his short time on the bench.  His court is friendly and pleasant to appear in.  He gives thoughtful consideration to all of the legal issues before him.  He's demonstrated time and again that his default position is one of compassion and kindness.  His rulings are fair and well-reasoned.  Being a judge is clearly his calling, and he has excelled at it.

Te'iva Bell is a former prosecutor who has been with the Public Defenders' Office since its inception.  She is my friend and a very dear person.  I've known Te'iva since she was a shy baby prosecutor, and I've watched her over the years as she has grown into the position of a confident, knowledgable leader in the Defense Bar.  I have all the confidence in the world that if she is elected that will be an excellent judge, as well.

What I write here will have no bearing on the election in the long run, so I will just say that I think Harris County will be well served by whichever candidate ultimately succeeds.  It is a shame that they cannot both serve.  Hopefully, someday they can.

351st District Court -- Natalia "Nata" Cornelio (D) vs. Arlene Hecht (R)

Earlier this year, after I had made my recommendations in the primary races, I received a phone call from Natalia "Nata" Cornelio.  I had stated my intention of voting for Judge George Powell in the Democratic Primary for the 351st, and she wanted to talk about it.  She wasn't upset with anything I had written about her (or Judge Powell), but she wanted to make sure that I understood her views on the Criminal Justice System and why she was running for the Bench.  It ended up being a pretty long phone call and one that I enjoyed very much.  We've had a subsequent conversation now that she is the official Democratic candidate, and I enjoyed that talk, too.

As I noted in my primary write-up, although Nata is not as familiar of a face around the Harris County CJC, she definitely has strong credentials in criminal defense -- her practice has just centered more around the Federal System.  Those who know her personally are big fans of hers, and after my conversations with her, so am I.  She is very passionate about the Criminal Justice System in Harris County, and is very eager to tackle the issues we are all facing under the pandemic.  We talked for a long time about effective and creative ideas about getting the wheels of Justice moving again.  Not only was I very impressed by her enthusiasm for the tasks ahead, but I was also appreciative of her open-mindedness in seeking input from multiple sources.

In my last conversation with Nata, she mentioned that she had an opponent in November, which was surprising news to me.  I thought the 351st Bench was uncontested after the primary.  Sure enough, I learned that Arlene Hecht was running for office.  Although the last name sounded familiar in the political world, I had never heard of Arlene Hecht.  So, I did some internet sleuthing and didn't really find out all that much more about her.

Her own website says she graduated from law school in 1991, but then states she's been practicing law for 11 years.  I'm not a mathematician, but it seems that there may be some gap years in there somewhere.  She also lists herself as a defense attorney and prosecutor.  I've been practicing in Harris County in some capacity since 1999, and I have never seen her nor heard of her prior to this time.   Being the social butterfly that I am (although I'm not as much as I used to be), I tend to at least know of most people who come through the courthouse, so I find my unfamiliarity with Ms. Hecht to be somewhat unusual.

She is apparently currently an employee of Kim Ogg's District Attorney's Office, but given Ogg's penchant for handing out positions to friends and supporters, that isn't saying much.  She is apparently a fairly recent addition to the Office and is assigned to the intake division, where she doesn't handle cases beyond their initial filings.  There seems to be a very vast difference when you look at the qualifications between the two candidates that should make this decision a no-brainer.

My vote:  Natalia "Nata" Cornelio

County Court at Law # 12 (Unexpired Term) -- Genesis Draper (D) vs. Linda Garcia (R)

When Judge Genesis Draper was appointed by the Commissioners' Court to fill the vacancy of Court # 12, I had never met her.  I knew her husband, Brandon Leonard, who is a friend and all-around fantastic human being, but I'd never met his wife.  When she took the Bench, I learned more about her credentials and experience in the Criminal Justice System, and I remain confused as to how I never met her before.

Earlier this year, I had a case that went to trial in her court and I had the opportunity to see Judge Draper in action.  To say that I became a fan of hers would be an understatement.

Judge Draper navigated a case where the State's prosecutor and I had a very big difference of opinion on the rules of evidence, discovery, and the law.  She held the State to their duties and obligations and she held me to the same standards.  But what struck me as we tried this case was that there was absolutely no uncertainty in how Judge Draper handled her courtroom or her rulings.  She knew the law and she knew it off the top of her head.  That's not always the case in all courtrooms.  She ruled against me at times and she ruled for me on others.  Whether her rulings benefited my case or not, they were all sound.  

Without rehashing the details of the case, which was dismissed shortly after a jury was seated, she made very clear to the State that she expected more from them than what they were putting forth in cases set for trial.  She emphasized to them the need to better evaluate their cases prior to setting them for trial.  She also expertly addressed the issue of a Batson challenge being made against the State.  Without embarrassing anyone involved, she emphasized the importance of a very key component of our Criminal Justice System that is often overlooked.  I can't do her words justice as I try to remember them off the top of my head, but I recall thinking that they belonged in a legal opinion or a textbook on criminal procedure.  

My experience trying a case in front of Judge Draper left me of the opinion that I hope to see her going on to higher and higher benches in the years to come.

Judge Draper's opponent in this is Linda Garcia, who is also someone that I highly respect and consider a friend.  She had a previous tenure on the bench in County Court at Law # 16, which she lost in the Democratic sweep of 2016.  She is a very experienced lawyer who enjoys an outstanding reputation among her peers.  She was respected in her roles as Assistant District Attorney and on the Board of Pardons and Parole, as well.  I honestly don't know of anyone who has anything negative to say about Linda.  I certainly don't.  She's a great person and a great lawyer.

But, in my opinion, Judge Draper is a rock star at her job and is probably destined for an even bigger stage.

My vote:  Genesis Draper

County Court at Law # 16 -- Darrell Jordan (D)(I) vs. Bill Harmon (R)

Those of you who have followed this blog for a decent amount of time are probably aware by now that Judge Darrell Jordan and I are not exactly the best of friends.  I've written about those reasons in the past and he has let me know that he did not appreciate that.  I understand that.  I'm not going to go back over those reasons.  

I did want to bring up those personal issues because I want to give Judge Jordan credit for never once having let them affect how he has treated me or my clients who have appeared before him in his court.   I sincerely appreciate that, because I'm sure that is not always an easy thing to do. 

I would also be remiss if I didn't point out some of the things that I've seen Judge Jordan do that I think are both progressive and helpful from the Bench.  If I'm not mistaken, he was the first judge from the county courts to support the bail reform lawsuit that ultimately led to much-needed changes in stopping people from pleading out on cases simply to get released from custody.  It was a controversial decision but a good one.  He was also one of the first judges to come up with the radical idea of not making Defendants show up for unnecessary court appearances unless there was a substantive matter that needed to be addressed on a case.

These decisions haven't always gone without controversy, but Judge Jordan has not shied away from them.  In his court, the State does not have a "home-field advantage," and as a Judge who took the Bench prior to the 2016 Democratic Sweep, he was often alone in making some of those tough decisions.

There probably could not be a starker contrast to Judge Jordan than former County Court at Law and District Court Judge Bill Harmon.  In his days on the bench, Judge Harmon never failed to be a wildly entertaining storyteller and generally fun person to hang around.  However, he was one of the most pro-State judges to take the bench.  He relished his awards from Mothers Against Drunk Driving and put them on display even when asked to take them down by defense attorneys during a trial.

The Criminal Justice System has evolved in the 21 years since I've been apart of it.  The days of the State being treated preferentially treated over the Defense have given way to a stronger emphasis on the presumption of innocence.  Judge Harmon is a throwback to how things used to be while Judge Jordan is an example of how things have evolved as they should.

My vote:  Darrell Jordan

Harris County Sheriff -- Ed Gonzalez (D)(I) vs. Joe Danna (R)

Although the actions of the Harris County Sheriff don't really directly affect the Criminal Justice Center, I would be remiss if I didn't take a moment to point out the pretty damn phenomenal job that Sheriff Ed Gonzalez has done during his first term as Sheriff.  

The past four years have been filled with more turbulence than I can think of since I've lived in Houston,  Sheriff Gonzalez started out his term having to deal with Hurricane Harvey and he's been dealing with the COVID crisis all year.  In addition to his normal day to day operations, he's been handed one major problem to deal with after another.  He's done so while avoiding any major scandals or drop in morale in his department.  That's no small accomplishment in an office his size and Sheriff Gonzalez deserves to be commended for it.

I don't know Joe Danna and have nothing negative to say about him, but Sheriff Gonzalez has been a rock star in his own right.  He has navigated the Harris County Sheriff's Office through some very choppy waters with purpose and grace.  I wish him another four years and many more at a job that he is so clearly good at.

My vote:  Ed Gonzalez

So, those are my recommendations for the races directly related to the Harris County Criminal Justice System.  As always, there are some other races that have ties to what we do at 1201 Franklin.  

HCDA-alumni and attorney Akilah Bacy (D) would be a great choice for Texas House District 138.

HCDA-alumni and defense attorney Ann Johnson (D) would be a great choice for State Rep for District 134.

HCDA-alumni David Newell (R) has been doing a great job on the Court of Criminal Appeals and deserves your vote.

My friend Veronica Rivas-Molloy (D) isn't from the Criminal Justice World, but she's been working hard to get input on the issues that affect us all.  I've known Veronica for 20 years and she would make an outstanding Justice for 1st Court of Appeals.

And finally, our old friend and former-Harris County District Clerk Chris Daniel (R) (man, I miss him as D.C.) is running for tax assessor.  He's a good man who does a good job with his responsibilities.  I'm glad to see him on the ballot again.

Whether you like all, some, or none of my recommendations, I hope that you will take the time to vote.  As always, I have a lot to say about candidates, but anyone who puts themselves out there to run for office has my respect for the time and effort put into the endeavor.  

The least the rest of us can do is turn out to vote.   

Thursday, July 2, 2020

Early Voting Has Begun for the 2020 Runoff

With everything going in the world, it is easy to overlook the fact that early voting began on Monday for all Texas runoff elections, including a few that affect the Harris County Criminal Justice System.  Election Day is officially on July 14th.

Voting locations have taken all the necessary precautions to ensure that voters have a safe experience while voting.  We've all changed our routine habits and safety precautions over the past several months because of COVID, but if you have felt safe enough to venture out to go to the grocery store, for fast food, or get gas for your car, you should feel safe enough to go vote.

As always, there are multiple voting locations open around Harris County, and you can find them by going to https://www.harrisvotes.org/ for more information.

IMPORTANT NOTICE:  You can vote in the runoff election EVEN IF you didn't vote in the primary back in March

There are no Republican runoff races on the ballot this year that directly affect the Harris County Criminal Justice World with the major exception of Sheriff.   Candidates Joe Danna and Paul Day are facing off against each other to see who will challenge incumbent Sheriff Ed Gonzalez on the ballot in November.  I'm not personally familiar with either Mr. Danna or Mr. Day so I don't have a recommendation here.  

Whoever wins the runoff will have a very uphill battle against Sheriff Gonzalez.

On the Democratic Ballot, there are a handful of contested races that deserve your attention. 

339th District Court

In the March primary, Harris County Assistant Public Defender Te'iva Bell garnered 44% of the vote in a three-person contest.  Her opponent, Candace White, received 36%.  As I noted in my earlier write up on the primaries, I don't know Candace White.  I see that she is a municipal court judge, which handles only low-level misdemeanor cases.

By contrast, I've known Te'iva Bell since she was a brand new prosecutor at the District Attorney's Office.  She was my friend then and I'm proud to say that she is still my friend.  After leaving the D.A.'s Office, she went on to become one of the original defenders at the Public Defenders Office.  She has become a leader and respected voice in that Office, handling some of the most serious cases.  She is by far the most qualified candidate.

My Vote:  Te'iva Bell


Justice, 14th Court of Appeals - Place Seven

My friend (and wife of my friend and fellow defense attorney, Lewis Thomas) Cheri Thomas is in a runoff for Justice of the 14th Court of Appeals against Tamika "Tami" Craft.

Cheri has an amazing legal resume after having graduated from the University of Texas Law School with honors.  She worked in a Federal clerkship for the Honorable Jorge Solis in the Northern District of Texas before going to work for Baker Botts.  From Baker Botts, she went on to become a partner with Stuart, PC.  In 2017, she became a staff attorney for the 14th Court of Appeals, where she has spent the past three years working on both civil and criminal cases.  She is uniquely qualified for the job.

Ms. Craft's campaign website does not list have a detailed list of her professional resume, but I found this interesting article on law.com that interviewed both candidates, and left me with a lot of questions about her background.  I encourage you to read it and come to your own conclusions, but I think it is pretty clear that Cheri has more experience for this position.

My Vote:  Cheri Thomas

And also . . .

State Senator, District 138

If you happen to live in District 138 (and if you don't know, go check,  You really should know these things), HCDA alumni, defense attorney and my friend Akilah Bacy almost avoided a runoff with an impressive 46.77% of the vote in a three-person race in the March primary.  If you are voting in the Democratic Primary in District 138, please go vote for Akilah!

Not my District, but my vote would totally go to:  Akilah Bacy

Whether you agree with my recommendations or not on these elections, please remember that ALL candidates on both sides of the ballot work their butts off on campaigns for the opportunity to serve the public.  They ALL deserve your consideration and they ALL deserve your participation in the voting process.  

Don't let COVID keep you away from voting.  

Monday, May 18, 2020

Shopping with D.A. Kim

After wrapping up her insanely huge waste of time weeks-long inquisition into finding what prosecutors might be mocking her behind her back (which landed her in an excellent article in Texas Monthly written by Michael Hardy, in case you haven't seen it), Harris County District Attorney Kim Ogg has apparently found herself getting bored by the pandemic.

I mean, sure, the Judges, the Defense Bar, the Prosecutors, and Law Enforcement are all working long hours to figure out the complicated balancing act between public safety and Constitutional rights, but Kim is a multi-tasker.  She's got time to oppose PR bonds, give three press conferences, and hunt down disloyal prosecutors like the dogs that they are, all before noon!  Press Conference Kim has got so much time on her hands that she feels like doing a little shopping.

Today, I was greatly amused to receive an e-mail from "DA Kim Ogg" entitled "Continued Support for Local Businesses."

To be fair, the e-mail came from Ogg's campaign e-mail account and not her official government e-mail address (the one she used when she was sending out an office-wide e-mail telling her subordinates who they needed to vote for in the State Bar election).  However, the e-mail did arrive at 10:23 a.m., which was when the rest of the prosecutors at the Office were busily dealing with a healthy Monday morning docket.  That's interesting timing, because clearly the e-mail was nothing more than a rather lame campaign stunt and it was definitely being sent during work hours.


In the e-mail, the artist-formerly-known-as-Press-Conference-Kim has apparently switched titles to Chamber-of-Commerce-Kim, as she encourages the reader to please consider shopping locally, noting her "campaign's initiative to support small local businesses."

Some may wonder,"What exactly does a District Attorney have to do with starting an initiative to support small local businesses?"  Well, I've done the research, and it turns out the answer to that question is "nothing."  However, far be it from Chamber-of-Commerce-Kim to pass up an opportunity to use her "DA" title to encourage people to specifically shop at three of her preferred stores.

"DA Kim" gives a shoutout to The Harmonious Kitchen (which,  I believe would be a creative way to describe the exact opposite of the D.A.'s Office's current workplace atmosphere), Vincent Ford's Custom Men's Apparel (um, okay), and Pizzitola's BBQ (which DA Kim notes "has the best ribs in Houston!  Don't believe me?  Go give them a try!").   I'm not saying anything negative about these places, but Kim's awkward endorsements have kind of given me a case of the giggles.  Like, now I have this visual image of Kim staring awkwardly into the camera and yelling that "Harris County D.A. saves you money!!!" as she jumps in the air with a handful of currency.

I don't think there is necessarily anything illegal or particularly wrong with Kim hawking products like Snoop Dog selling Hot Pockets . . . 

(And yes, this is apparently a real thing.)

. . . but it just feels a little unseemly, doesn't it?  Especially when she refers to herself as "DA Kim Ogg" in her advertisement's signature?

All of this, of course, has inspired me to think of other Kim Ogg-worthy commercials:

"Got a loud co-worker in the next room that's always yelling at people about them not knowing when she takes her lunch hour?  Try Kim Ogg Earplugs.  They are fit for a King.  A Vivian King."
"First Assistant being a little too argumentative with you over the right thing to do?  Try Berg-Be-Gone in an aerosol can.  One spray and he'll be out of your office faster than Andrew Smith refusing to commit perjury for you.  Now in unscented!"
"Ungrateful police officers using your data bases while complaining about you to the media?  Never again!  With the Joe Gamaldi Data Blocker, you can shut down these ungrateful data moochers until they get their attitudes adjusted.  No Justice?  No problem, with the Joe Gamaldi Data Blocker."
"Disruptive prosecutors talking about you behind your back?  Try the Bark Internet Monitor for Parents.  It will tell you what's really going on with your employees' personal cell phones and computers."
"Got former employees suing you for a couple of thousand dollars for wrongful termination and/or unemployment?  Give the Mize Law Firm a call.  Tell her Kim sent you!"

I could literally do this all day, but I've got to go.  I've been eating too much Pizzitola BBQ and don't fit in any of my old suits anymore.  I'm going to give Vincent Ford a call for some custom men's apparel and then start working on my diet with the Harmonious Kitchen.

Tuesday, February 18, 2020

The 2020 Democratic Primary Race for Harris County District Attorney

The two biggest local races on the Democratic Primary ballot are the races for Harris County District Attorney and Harris County Sheriff.  Although Sheriff Ed Gonzalez does have a couple of primary challengers, he's done a very good job during his first term and has managed to avoid any major controversy.  He's got my vote and I can't imagine this primary being too difficult for him to manage.

Obviously, the same cannot be said for incumbent District Attorney Kim Ogg, who has courted controversy at every turn, literally before she was even sworn into office.

I supported Ogg in 2016.   Although I didn't know her very well, I agreed with her platform on the future of prosecuting.  Employing the old adage that Judge Caprice Cosper once told me that "there are people in this business who you are mad at and people whom you are afraid of and it would behoove you to learn the difference," I felt that Ogg's beliefs more or less echoed this sentiment -- focus resources on going after violent offenders and start easing up on low-level, victimless offenses.  I believed in giving opportunities to those low-level offenders to keep their records clean so that a mistake early in life didn't cost them a future.  Although then-District Attorney Devon Anderson was a friend (and most of the prosecutors that I knew were happy to have her as their leader), I thought that her views on the Criminal Justice System were not in step with what they should have been.

So, back then, I voted for Ogg.

And it really, really pissed off a lot of my prosecutor friends.  There's one former friend that won't even speak to me after three years.  SPOILER ALERT:  I'm pretty sure Donald Trump candidacy had A WHOLE LOT more influence on Ogg's victory than my 2016 support of her did.

But, I digress.

While I liked what I was hearing from Kim Ogg's platform in 2016, what I failed to account for was Kim Ogg herself.  As I mentioned earlier, I knew her in passing and she had always been friendly.  She certainly didn't seem to be as cheerfully evil as former District Attorney Pat Lykos.  As someone who (along with eight of my coworkers) got fired by Lykos, I never thought that Ogg's political vindictiveness would be anywhere near  Lykosian levels.

Boy, I sure missed the mark on that one, didn't I?

Before even taking office, Ogg let roughly forty experienced prosecutors know that she would not be needing their services under her administration.  She found various and sundry reasons to justify her reasoning for the firings, but in the end, it pretty much came down to the fact that they were either a) perceived as being too loyal to Devon Anderson; or b) had pissed off a loyal Ogg crony.

Sadly, she was just giving a very stark preview of what was to come under her Administration.

For the past three years, the Ogg Administration has largely been governed by the principle of what is best for Kim Ogg, the individual.  From an absolute onslaught of self-serving press conferences (that more often than not turned out to be more puffing than prosecuting) to the shameless hiring of campaign workers "community outreach" specialists (like Clarence Bradford and Dwight Boykins) with Office funds, Ogg has been much more effective at promoting herself than she has been promoting Justice.  I'm not naive.  I get that this is part of being an elected official, but Ogg's use of Office resources to support her electability is gratuitous, shameless, and unseemly for the position.

On the flip side of the Ogg temper is what she's done to those who have crossed her.  One only has to look to last year's firings of Andrew Smith (who dared to stand up to her when she was feeling slightly . . . shall we say "perjurous?") and her own First Assistant, Tom Berg (who disagreed with her on a policy matter).  Both of these men were (and remain) respected attorneys with the highest of integrity, but they learned the hard way that disagreeing with Ogg makes a prosecutor per se a bad public servant in her book.

And let us not forget that her beef with the Houston Police Department (because HPOU President Joe Gamaldi had dared to criticize her publicly) led to her temporarily blocking the entire Houston Police Department's access to the Consolidated Criminal History Database.  Please let that sink in for a moment.  Kim Ogg got so mad at what the Police Union said about her that she blocked access to a computer database used for law enforcement.  There for awhile, I had more access to criminal records as a defense attorney than HPD. 

When I read the Houston Chronicle's endorsement of Ogg on Sunday, I literally laughed out loud when one of the first sentences described her as "stable."  Quite frankly, I can't think of a word that would describe her more inaccurately.  The Chron also stated that "her integrity is sound," which I find genuinely perplexing if one takes even a passing glance at her dealings with Amir Mireskandari.

Mireskandari was Ogg campaign committee chairman in 2016, and did such a great job for her that she appointed him as a "consultant" on financial crime cases.  I guess they were already filled up on "community outreach" personnel.  As it turned out, Mireskandari was apparently using his position within the Ogg Administration to make some pretty shady side deals with some poker gaming rooms for his own personal financial business.  This is kind of akin to letting the proverbial fox guard the henhouse. 

The Mireskandari Scandal led to cases being dismissed and ultimately Mireskandari being terminated from the Office.  Strangely, it doesn't look like Ogg ever investigated what crimes Mireskandari may have committed in the process.  That's kind of a strange contrast from the DA who once threatened to prosecute former prosecutors for disparaging her.  I guess the lesson here is that if you talk bad about her, you might get prosecuted.  Use her office to scam people out of money, no big deal.

The bottom line is that Kim Ogg is neither stable nor is her integrity sound.  It is laughable that the Chronicle would seem to think that.  It's like even the Chronicle editorial board doesn't actually read the Chronicle, either.

As most of you know, Ogg has three former prosecutors challenging her, and my belief is that each of them is a better choice than the incumbent.  Whether or not that will translate into a victory for them remains to be seen.

Former prosecutor Audia Jones quit the District Attorney's Office a year or so ago and almost immediately announced her candidacy to run against her former boss.  Of all the candidates, I probably know her the least, although I am a big fan of her husband, 180th District Court Judge DaSean Jones, whom I've known since he was an attorney.  Of all the candidates, Audia Jones is certainly the youngest and she does not have the years of experience that the others do, having served as a prosecutor for approximately three years.  Her platform is very progressive, and she has garnered the endorsement of several prominent progressive groups who support that platform.  Last week, she even got an endorsement from Bernie Sanders.

I am genuinely curious to see how Jones does in the primary.  The progressive movement is certainly vocal and active across the country, especially within the Criminal Justice System.  However, I think that it remains to be seen how that translates into votes in Harris County.  It is a platform that will definitely appeal to younger voters, but I don't know whether or not it will be enough to unseat an entrenched incumbent like Ogg.

Former prosecutor and highly respected defense attorney Todd Overstreet is also running against Kim Ogg.  Overstreet is a friend and a very popular figure within the Criminal Justice Center.  He is a very skilled litigator who runs an extremely successful law practice.  I'm not entirely sure why he would want to take on the job of District Attorney, but he is unquestionably a man who follows his own path in life.  On the campaign trail, he has indicated that he believes in a slightly more conservative approach to criminal justice than the other candidates.  This has resonated with many former prosecutors from "the old days" but I'm not sure whether or not that will be enough to unseat Ogg.

It should be no surprise to anyone that reads this blog, that my personal endorsement for Harris County District Attorney is Carvana Cloud.

As I've said before and will say again and again and again, Carvana is someone who is uniquely qualified to be the District Attorney.  Her platform is the same progressive platform that led me to vote Democratic in 2016, and her ability to actually execute that platform as an effective and truly stable leader is what makes her the best candidate for the office.

Carvana is a proud Houstonian from Acres Homes, a neighborhood that has embraced her every bit as much as she has embraced it.  She is a bilingual graduate of Kinkaid High School and a former prosecutor.  I first met her when I was still a prosecutor and even back then, she exuded the confidence, integrity, and charisma of an effective prosecutor and leader within the office.  She left under the Lykos Administration after Lykos targeted her for her support of her Lykos's opponent in the 2008 general election, but returned as a Division Chief under Ogg.

Ogg recruited Carvana out of private practice to be a Division Chief in her new administration and subsequently promoted her to Trial Bureau Chief.  In that sense, I guess you could say that even Kim Ogg has endorsed Carvana's abilities to prosecute, administrate, and seek justice -- and she did so twice!

But the most important reason that I am endorsing Carvana Cloud is that Carvana wants to be the District Attorney to serve the Office and the people of Harris County that it represents.  She is there to help, not there to use the Office to promote her own personal agenda and petty grievances.  She is living proof that a progressive prosecutor can be an outstanding prosecutor.  She is loved by her former co-workers at the District Attorney's Office and she is loved by the Defense Bar.

Carvana Cloud would make a truly exceptional District Attorney.

My Vote:  Carvana Cloud





Sunday, February 16, 2020

The 2020 Criminal Justice Primaries

With early voting beginning this Tuesday, February 18th, it occurred to me that I might want to get off my lazy butt and write down my thoughts on this year's primaries.

It's an extremely interesting year, in my opinion, because for the first time since I've been a voter in Harris County, the Republican primary is a virtual Ghost Town compared to the Democratic primary.  Most of the District and County Courts that are on the ballot (and with one exception, held by Democratic incumbents) didn't even field candidates.  Those that did have candidates on the ballot were uncontested races, so I'm not going to even address them right now.

The decimating defeats of 2016 and 2018 have apparently led most aspiring Republican candidates to save their money rather than waste it on a campaign.  2020 marks the first year where voters will no longer have the "straight ticket" voting option in November, but I guess that hasn't inspired too many candidacies.  Personally, I do think that lack of straight-ticket voting will narrow the margin of victory in November, but not so significantly that Republican candidates will take back benches in Harris County.

The only contested Republican primary that is directly involving the Harris County Criminal Justice Center is the race for District Attorney.

Republican Primary for District Attorney
The Republican race for Harris County District Attorney is a three-person race pitting former Harris County District Court Chief Lori DeAngelo against former Montgomery County District Court Chief and Houston Police Officers' Union Attorney Mary Nan Huffman and noted moron, Lloyd Oliver.

To be clear, Lloyd Oliver, who last ran for District Attorney as a Democrat, should not be considered an actual candidate by anyone who places even the smallest amount of pride in his or her vote.  He is a vile, misogynistic, and homophobic defense attorney who runs in every election with no expectation of succeeding, regardless of party.  His candidacy is nothing more than a tired joke that we are all forced to suffer through every two years.

By stark contrast, Lori DeAngelo and Mary Nan Huffman are real candidates, albeit they are new to running for office.  I've never met Mary Nan Huffman in person, but she has an excellent reputation with many of our mutual friends.  She's a ten-year veteran of the Montgomery County District Attorney's Office, where she rose to the level of felony chief.   She's been one of the Houston Police Officers Union attorneys since leaving MoCo, and she is obviously the candidate being supported by the Union.  I don't know how well she is known in the Harris County Republican circles, so it will be interesting to see how well she does.

I've known Lori DeAngelo since 1999 when I first started at the D.A.'s Office, where she was already prosecuting.  Her tenure far exceeded mine, serving as a prosecutor for over 20 years.  She worked in different divisions within the Office before returning to the Trial Bureau as a chief.  I like Lori and I consider her to be a friend.  I enjoyed dealing with her as a practical and no-nonsense prosecutor when I had cases in her court.  She was fair and she also recognized when a case had weaknesses for the State.  She wasn't scared to dismiss a case if the evidence didn't rise to the level of being provable beyond a reasonable doubt.   She left the Office under her own terms and in frustration with the way Kim Ogg was running the Office.

I think both candidates are running for similar reasons and that their platforms are relatively similar as well.   Unless some extraordinary circumstances occur between now and November, however, there is a high likelihood that this is just a battle to see who comes in second place.  That's unfortunate because I think Huffman and DeAngelo are both qualified candidates.

I'm not planning on voting in the Republican primary, but if I was, I would vote for Lori DeAngelo.

Now, that we've covered the one and only Republican CJC race, we can move on to the five District Court races that have contested Democratic primaries.  As noted above, with the exception of the 339th District Court's Judge Jesse McClure, all of the District Courts are currently held by Democratic Incumbents.  Judge McClure was appointed to the Court when Judge Maria T. Jackson stepped down to run for County Commissioner against Rodney Ellis.  Additionally, 337th District Court Judge Herb Ritchie is retiring at the end of his term.  Three incumbent judges, Nikita Harmon, Randy Roll, and George Powell drew challengers in their primaries.

It is worth noting that (with the exception of the 339th), there are no Republican challengers.  Whoever wins the primary will be the judge on January 1, 2021.

176th District Court
District Court Judge Nikita Harmon took the bench in 2016 as part of the Democratic sweep.  Prior to that, she had been an attorney and municipal court judge.  At the time, she was relatively unknown to most regulars in the CJC unless they were attorneys who also covered muni court.  During her first year on the Bench, she got some unusual attention when she got into a bizarre dispute with 263rd District Court Judge Jim Wallace over courtroom use in the wake of Hurricane Harvey.

I've only appeared in Judge Harmon's Court on a handful of occasions, so I don't really have a depth of knowledge in giving a review of her performance.  Those times I've been there, she has been a little more formal than many judges.  I have not tried a case or a contested hearing to her, so I'd have to defer to someone with more knowledge on what that is like.

Judge Harmon is being challenged by former HCDA prosecutor and current defense attorney, Bryan Acklin.  I've known Bryan since his days at the D.A.'s Office, and he is a friend.  I enjoyed working with him when he was a prosecutor and found him to be friendly, reasonable and prepared in his handling of cases.  As a defense attorney, I've seen him throw himself enthusiastically into his work.  He is a zealous advocate for his clients while remaining personable and friendly with his prosecutorial opponents.  He researches the law and he applies it to his clients' advantage.

My Vote:  Brian Acklin

179th District Court
District Court Judge Randy Roll is serving his second tour of duty as a District Court Judge of the 179th.  He won the Bench in 2008, lost it in 2012, and won it back again in 2016.  I always hate writing about Judge Roll, because he is truly a nice, nice man.  However, he just always seems to find himself in the middle of controversy as a judge.

I seriously want to be able to endorse Judge Roll, because he is kind.  I am very aware that I've written things on this blog that have hurt his feelings, but to his immense credit, he has never been anything but courteous and professional to me in court and he has certainly never held what I've said about him against my clients.  I really like him as a person very much.  I just wish he would quit doing such questionable things from the Bench.

Judge Roll's opponent in this race is former Assistant District Attorney and current defense attorney, Ana Martinez.  I've known Ana from her years as a prosecutor, and she is one the few candidates running that I've actually gone to trial against.  She whipped my butt in trial (although I'd like to think that was partially due to the fact that she had some pretty good evidence on her side).  I've always believed that there is no better way to learn who a prosecutor (or defense attorney) is than to try a case against them, and I learned a lot about Ana.  She was an extremely impressive, fair, and dedicated prosecutor and she has retained those traits as a defense attorney.

As a prosecutor, Ana worked in human trafficking, where she was passionate about going after those who profited from the sex trade.  As a defense attorney, she has focused her practice on helping people who have been caught up in the sex trade as workers.  She is dedicated to making a difference in their lives and she's doing a pretty remarkable job of it.  She is also a hard worker who educates herself on the law and operates from a place of compassion.  She'd make a great judge.

My Vote:  Ana Martinez

337th District Court
With the retirement of current Judge Herb Ritchie, four candidates are running for the Democratic nomination:  former prosecutor and current defense attorney Colleen Gaido, defense attorney John Clark, defense attorney Brennen Dunn, and general practicing attorney David Vuong.

I don't know David Vuong at all, although we are friends on Facebook (NOTE:  I get a lot of Facebook friend requests from candidates).  I don't recall him being a face that I see very often around the courthouse and I've never dealt with him.  He does seem very enthusiastic about his yard signs, but other than that, I don't think he has the qualifications of the other three candidates.

I don't know Brennen Dunn personally either and I see that he lists several areas of law practice on his State Bar profile.  However, I do know that he has an established reputation as a criminal defense attorney, and as a good one, at that.

I do know John Clark.  He's been a practicing criminal defense attorney for as long as I can remember, serving for a very long time as the contract attorney in the 208th District Court.

With all due respect to the other candidates, however, it is hard to imagine a better candidate for judge than Colleen Gaido.  Colleen is a former Harris County Assistant District Attorney who was probably one of the most respected and beloved prosecutors that Office has ever produced.  She literally may be the most popular person to have ever worked there.  I mean, everyone loves Colleen.  She was fair, friendly, reasonable, knowledgable, and nice.  Her co-workers loved her and so did defense attorneys.  She was no pushover, but she never relished punishing people during her ADA days.  She had a strong sense of right and wrong, but no matter how right she was, that never translated into arrogance or anything else negative.  As a defense attorney, she remains equally loved by both sides and there is a groundswell of support for her.

She is ultra-qualified to be judge.  She's probably ultra-qualified to be president, for that matter.  I would vote for her over myself in any given election.  She's a fantastic candidate, friend, and human.  I hope to see her on the Bench in January.

My Vote:  Colleen Gaido

339th District Court
When former 339th District Court Judge Maria T. Jackson stepped down to run against Commissioner Rodney Ellis, three Democratic candidates announced that they intended to run for the Bench.   The winner will face off against Republican Judge Jesse McClure (who was appointed by Governor Abbott to fulfill Jackson's unexpired term) in November.  Attorneys Dennis Powell and Candace White are running against former prosecutor and current Assistant Public Defendant Te'iva Bell for the Democratic nomination.

I didn't immediately recognize Powell's name, but I recognized his face when I looked up his website.  He is a longtime attorney who does practice criminal law.  I'm not sure whether or not he practices it exclusively, but I have certainly seen him around the criminal courthouse for years.  I only know him in passing.

I'm not familiar with Candace White at all, although her face does seem familiar when I looked at her website.  Her resume does not indicate that she has a very strong background in criminal law, other than being a municipal court judge, which handles only the lowest level of misdemeanors.

I've known Te'iva Bell since she was a baby prosecutor at the D.A.'s Office.  She was my friend then and I'm proud to call her my friend now.  She left the D.A.'s Office for defense work awhile ago and she's one of the original attorneys who went to work for the Public Defender's Office when it was first established.  She has dedicated her professional career to criminal justice and she is a very zealous and skilled advocate for her clients.  She's also one of the nicest people I know, and I look forward to voting for her this week.

My Vote:  Te'iva Bell

351st District Court
Incumbent 351st George Powell is running for reelection against challenger and attorney Natalia "Nata" Cornelio.  You may recall that there was some drama over Judge Powell being on that ballot after there was some confusion over filing fees.  Fortunately, Judge Powell will be on the ballot in March.

I've known Judge Powell since he was a defense attorney.  I liked him then and I like him now.  I have only had one or two cases in his court since he won the Bench in 2016, but those limited experiences have always been positive.  He is well-liked by both prosecutors and defense attorneys as a Judge who is friendly, reasonable and attentive to the cases before him.

I do not know Natalia Cornelio personally.  She certainly has some impressive items on her resume, including working as a Federal Public Defender, working for the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, and as the Director of Criminal Justice Reform at the Texas Civil Rights Project.  That being said, she doesn't have experience inside the Harris County Criminal Justice Center like Judge Powell does.  She seems to be the preferred candidate of some "higher ups" in the Democratic Party, who attempted to keep Judge Powell off the ballot.  Although there is nothing to suggest that Cornelio had anything at all to do with that, personally, it still bothers me.

My Vote:  George Powell

So, there you have it.

Seems like I'm forgetting something.

Oh yeah, that whole Democratic Primary for Harris County District Attorney.

I'm going to write a separate post about the race between Carvana Cloud, Todd Overstreet, Audia Jones, and incumbent Kim Ogg.  This may shock you, but I have a lot to say about that particular race.

But if you are just dying of anticipation to know who I'm voting for, SPOILER ALERT - - -

My Vote:  Carvana Cloud









Tuesday, December 3, 2019

Supporting Other Candidates in a Kim Ogg World

Around 9 a.m. on December 24, 2008, Acting Harris County District Attorney Ken Magidson called me into his office and told me (for the second time in a month) that I was fired.

"I'm firing you for what you wrote on your blog.  It's too much."

He actually uttered those words.

Under the circumstances, I was caught off guard.  I was already planning on that day being my last at the Office and taking comp time for the remainder of 2008.  My contract wasn't going to be renewed so I was done effectively at midnight on December 31st, anyway.

But getting fired cost me some money.  There was no taking comp time if you didn't work there anymore.  I think all in all, Magidson's decision to pull the trigger as an early Christmas present cost me around $4,000.  Given the fact that I was going through a divorce and had child support looming, that was kind of a kick in the financial crotch.

Over the past eleven years since that fateful day, I've revisited the idea of whether or not I should have filed a lawsuit on many occasions.  I thought about it.  In the end I decided it really wasn't worth the effort.  My life was going through a reboot at the time, and adding the pet project of a lawsuit wasn't really all that appealing.

There is still a part of me that wishes I had, because when Magidson uttered those words, he was telling me that he was terminating my employment because of words I had written -- outside of work -- while expressing my opinion.   Sometimes I wish I had made a different decision at the time, just for the principle of defending my 1st Amendment rights. On occasion, I get really angry at 2008 Me for not doing that.

I bring this up now for a couple of reasons.

Campaign season is upon us, and as I have mentioned before, there are already six candidates lined up to challenge incumbent District Attorney Kim Ogg for her job.  Several of those candidates are immensely more popular with prosecutors at the Office than Ogg is.  Given their druthers, most prosecutors that I know (and I know a whole lot of prosecutors) would love nothing more than to support the candidate of their choice.

But unfortunately, they work for Kim Ogg.  And as Ogg demonstrated last month by firing Andrew Smith, she is not afraid to fire an employee for blatantly unethical (and quite possibly illegal) reasons.  Although the job of a prosecutor is to seek justice, in Ogg's paranoid world, the primary job is to be loyal to her.  As she demonstrated with Andrew, she ain't afraid to shank somebody for crossing her.

As a result of Kim's erratic and ruthless behavior, don't expect to see too many current prosecutors exercising their 1st Amendment right to support a candidate other than her Royal Oggness.  Ogg's level of paranoia and retaliatory nature make Pat Lykos seem like Mahatma Gandi.  And keep in mind that Lykos had some of her loyalists staking out fundraising events for Mike Anderson, and she also seriously jacked with Carvana Cloud to retaliate against Carvana's support of Clarence Bradford for D.A.

I would imagine that Kim Ogg will be far more retaliatory towards any employee that she finds supporting any other candidate.  I say this in advance because I hope that nobody thinks that a lack of current prosecutors showing up at fundraisers for other candidates means that they don't support those other candidates.  They just don't want to get fired for that support.

From the outside, looking in, it is easy for critics to say, "Well, if they hate working for Kim Ogg so much, why don't they just quit?"  I heard that line a lot in 2012 when Mike Anderson was running against Lykos.  I'm sure we'll hear it again over the next few months.  It was a stupid criticism then and it would be equally stupid now.  Losing a job is a devastating event -- especially when you have a family to support and need things such as money and insurance.

Not to mention being a prosecutor is a fantastic job.  One can be loyal to the job without being loyal to the paranoid despot who is the current District Attorney.

If you are a current employee of the Harris County District Attorney's Office and you don't want to risk your job by supporting another candidate, there are still many things that you can do to give support. 

First and foremost, tell your family, friends, and neighbors your thoughts in private conversations.  Let them know what you think of your current boss and tell them why you think somebody else would make a better choice.  Encourage those same family, friends, and neighbors to learn more about those candidates and attend those fundraisers and "meet and greets" that you can't safely attend.  Let them know why you can't speak out in public, but find a way to educate them.  Encourage THEM to make a donation since you can't.

Although I don't know if this is still the current law, back in 2012, a candidate only had to list a donor who gave $50.00 or more to a campaign.  There were a lot of folks who donated $49.99 to Mike Anderson's campaign back then.  You don't have to go out in a blaze of glory by starting a blog that bashes Ogg or anything stupid like that, but you can still help other candidates if you so choose.

Sometimes, those little gestures of support are far more sincere and powerful than any donation or attendance at a fundraiser.

The Truth About Prosecuting Domestic Violence Cases

When I was in college at A&M, I worked as an intern at the Brazos County District Attorney's Office for two and a half years.  It wa...