08 Dec 2003 Sometimes It’s Best to Let the Liberals Dig Their Own Holes

David Almasi was kind enough to create a transcript of some of Project 21’s Horace Cooper’s exchange with liberal (and former National Bar Association president) Keith Watters on Hannity and Colmes on Friday, December 5. The topic was a Project 21 complaint filed with the Virginia Bar Association regarding NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund, Inc. president and director-general Elaine R. Jones allegedly colluding with the liberal-run Senate Judiciary Committee in 2002 to delay the confirmation of a federal judge for the purpose of obtaining a desired ruling in the University of Michigan affirmative action case.

Horace Cooper: “The whole purpose of our judicial system is to create a neutral forum for the decisions to be made. You are not allowed to pick the judge that’s going to handle your case. You’re not allowed to file a motion to qualify a judge solely for influence.”Alan Colmes: “Keith, do you see… Let me get Keith back in here. Do you see a difference in principle here?”

Keith Watters: “No, and I don’t see any merit to this complaint. I don’t think the NAACP Inc. Fund [sic] did anything improper. I think that this is being filed for political gain. Conservatives are sore losers.”

Cooper: “You can play smoke and mirror games all you want, but the reality is that attorneys can get disbarred for this type of behavior. This is a very, very serious violation. The breach that was involved here is to actually influence who is going to be hearing the case with the expectation – like a John Grisham novel – that you’re going to get the outcome you want.”

* * *

Cooper: “It is an ethical violation for a person who is party to a pending matter to attempt to influence either who a judge is or whether that judge can be maintained on that court as a way to determine the outcome. That cannot occur if we’re going to maintain any semblance that it’s a neutral court.”

Colmes: “Alright, Keith Watters, from an ethical standpoint, does Horace have a point? Is there an ethical problem here?”

Cooper: “It’s Rule 3.5.”

Colmes: “Hold on, let Keith speak. Does Elaine Jones have an ethical issue here?”

Watters: “I… I mean, you can always debate these things, and you can split hairs. I’ve known Elaine Jones for many, many years. She’s of utmost integrity. I don’t believe what I read, especially when it’s in the Wall Street Journal and these other conservative organs that just have this agenda to ship this country so far to the right…”

Cooper: “Smoke and mirrors!”

* * *

Sean Hannity: “Do you want that type of influence in the judiciary? Wait until a decision comes in our way, and then you can go ahead and put them on. Is that what you want?

Watters: “The only one who has a vote… The only one who has a vote in the Judiciary Committee of the Unites States Senate is our elected representatives. No one else. And people have a right to petition their representatives in a constitutional government.”

Cooper: “They have a right to petition their representatives, but what they don’t have a right to do is try to unfairly influence the outcome of a decision.”

Hannity: “Absolutely.”

Watters: “Why is it unfair?”

Cooper: “You are not allowed to either falsely attack the judge and get the judge removed to get a favorable judge there…”

Watters: “None… None of that happened. There is no false attack.”

Cooper: “The allegation is… The allegation is, and that’s what we’re asking to get a determination of, the allegation is that they requested that the person be delayed so that the outcome could happen.”