What does Gableman think of this lawyer?

The Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel reports that Albert Earl Ellis, who is charged with the serial killing of seven local women, has retained defense counsel.

Attorney Russell J.A. Jones announced Ellis, 49, is not responsible for the deaths.

On Wednesday Gableman's own lawyer, Mr. Jim Bopp of Terre Haute, IN, criticized another former defense attorney's "judgment" for being "willing to relieve a criminal from responsibility for his crime."

Mr. Jim Bopp, who represents Michael Gableman in an ongoing judicial ethics investigation in which Gableman stands accused of lying during the course of a political campaign, characterized the activities of defense attorneys as the "willingness to subvert our system of bringing criminals into account."

Where is the subversion exactly, one can't help but wonder.

Does it reside with lawyers performing obligations that are constitutionally guaranteed to criminal defendants, or with a State Supreme Court justice who holds such disparaging views of them?

Or maybe Gableman needs to distance himself from the opinions of his attorney.* After all, he's sitting in judgment of criminal appeals.

In the meantime, it makes even more sense today why a Milwaukee lawyer is seeking Gableman's recusal from his own criminal appeal.

Perhaps his recusal should be sought in every single one of them.

(Amusingly, Wisconsin Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen called the motions for recusal "an attack on our system of electing judges." Van Hollen may wish to reconsider who is launching an attack on what.)

* As in, by publicly and unequivocally denouncing them. Although that may be problematic, as Mr. Bopp's views were expressed in service of explaining the message of Judge Gableman's political campaign.

Speaking as the agent of Michael Gableman. In court. On the record.