Thank you, Robert! The plot thickens? My teeny, tiny brain is trying to figure out how a nationwide ban on abortion fosters "small government." But I'm just an ordinary American (who votes)...what do I know!
Meanwhile, latest news is January 6 Select Committee has "goal" to restart public hearings on September 28.
Lynell, I’m thinking that even if you were a whiz kid political scientist you’d be boondoggled trying to decipher the stunts that the GOPers are coming up with.
If you (and the readers) want an answer to your question about whether there is something fundamentally "off" in the Republican Party, may I highly recommend David Corn's new book, American Psychosis: A Historical Investigation of How the Republican Party Went Crazy - which goes back to 1945 to demonstrate that Truman was right in 1948 when he said during the campaign that "The only 'good Republicans' are pushing up daisies."
Unfortunately, I have to say as an author who pays his bills with his royalty payments, that Amazon always pays on time, so my publisher pays me on time, and unlike B&N and too many independents, doesn't finance their operation on credits for returns - which are charged against the author's account. Amazon sells everything they order.
Sometimes, the "good people" aren't as good as we wish they were.
I'm glad you made this point. I was thinking the other day about the days when every body, and not just farmers markets shoppers picked out their produce and put it in their own baskets/bags. But then I thought, people earn a living at factories that produce packaging and what would happen to them (no worries anytime soon!) That led me to an article on packaging trends - lots of cool concern for the environment. Is it always the case that innovation means some folks will lose their jobs? And others will learn new ones? I wonder how that could be a more just process? I know this is off topic but I actually enjoyed a few moments away from the need to salvage democracy!!
Robert asked about "the collapse of DOJ independence" with so many US Attorneys who "surrendered to Trump’s corrupting influence without a fight or second thought. How is that possible? ...Are law firms responsible for a 'win at all costs' attitude that rewards profit maximation and discourages ethical actions by their partners when they assume government posts (with the expectation that they will return to their firms)."
Bingo! We learned about the Federalist Society wielding the levers of power on behalf of the elite minority. Now we learn about Jones Day, a giant law firm that represents big corporations in the tobacco, pharmaceutical, and gun manufacturing industries, to name a few, that infiltrated the DOJ during the Trump administration.
Alex Wagner on MSNBC had a good interview on 9/13/22 of David Enrich about his new book, "Servants of the Damned" investigating the "often-corrosive power that giant law firms secretly wield over our politics, economy and society." Enrich comments that giant law firms have transformed the legal "profession" into the legal "industry."
More tales of how moneyed bullies take advantage of "rules," "norms," and "courtesy." Time to firm up the laws, fill in the cracks. Looking forward to informed commentary.
And one of Trump's special master nominees? Paul Huck, Jr., a former partner at the Jones Day firm.
Thanks, Ellie. I plan to write about Enrich's book this week. Many BIGLAW firms have partners who facilitated Trump's corruption. Those partners were welcomed back as conquering heroes and given large raises for the "access" they can sell to clients.
For example, Geoffrey Berman's book tells the story of Barr demanding that the SDNY prosecute Greg Craig as political payback to "even things out" for prosecutions of two Republicans in SDNY. Berman refused, telling Barr that Craig was innocent. Barr then "shopped" the political persecution to the US Attorney in DC--Jessie K. Liu, who indicted Craig. A jury acquitted Craig in five hours. Jessie K. Liu has been rewarded with a partnership at Skadden Arps, one of the the worlds largest and most profitable law firms. She is now listed in Chambers as one of the best lawyers in America. The system is broken. Everyone in the legal profession understands what Liu did. No one cares--at least not at the large law firms.
Thank you, Ellie, for mentioning the new book "Servants of the Damned" by David Enrich. I also watched Alex Wagner's show last night. The behavior of the Jones Day "law firm" stunned and horrified me, despite my knowing that many (all?) large (and some smaller) law firms get paid a fortune to evade the law and even after all the shocking behavior exhibited by TFG since he "descended" upon America.
Here is a quote from their website introduction to the book, by Mr. Enrich's publishers, for anyone who didn't yet hear the author speak.
"The NYT's Business Investigations Editor reveals the dark side of American law.
Delivering a "devastating and rollicking" (Carol Leonnig) exposé of the astonishing power wielded by the world’s largest law firms, David Enrich traces how one firm shielded OPIOID MAKERS, GUN COMPANIES, BIG TOBACCO, THE CATHOLIC CHURCH, RUSSIAN OLIGARCHS, FOX NEWS, and much of the FORTUNE 500; helped DONALD TRUMP get elected, govern, and evade investigation; masterminded the conservative remaking of THE COURTS . . . AND MADE A KILLING ALONG THE WAY." https://www.harpercollins.com/products/servants-of-the-damned-david-enrich?variant=40153396346914
With regard to healthcare, and reproductive healthcare in particular, why doesn’t America come into line with other developed countries and provide universal healthcare?
Abortion is a medical procedure, which some pregnant people electively chose. HOWEVER, HOWEVER, lots of pregnant people wind up having to have an abortion because of significant complications. An ectopic pregnancy NEVER results in a live birth. An incomplete miscarriage has serious implications for the health of the pregnant person. The list of complications is endless and is impossible to predict. Farm animals are treated with more concern than women currently are in a number of states. The Mothers Against Greg Abbott ad illustrates this point way better than I can. Why should state legislators (most of whom are male) get away with practicing medicine without a license? “Pregnancy is too complicated to legislate.” Jessica Valenti
I agree that state legislatures who pass these absolute anti-abortion laws should be sued for practicing medicine without a license! I don't even understand how these legislatures who are majority male have any standing to legislate against women rights. Why does a doctor now have to consult a lawyer before treating her patient?
Very good question. Garland and Lisa Monaco just need to prosecute a few of them and the rest will plead guilty to avoid jail. Lisa Monaco was charged with doing they internal investigations of the DOJ when she took office. Two years in, crickets. Perhaps Geoffrey Berman's book will embarrass the DOJ into action--as the January 6th Committee hearings plainly did.
Pittypat really doesn’t seem to have a clue, and that is saying something in a political party that encompasses Lauren Boebert and Marjorie Taylor Greene, Josh Hawley, Mark Meadows, ad nauseam.
I did notice Senator Graham's appearance during his news conference yesterday. He looked upset, haggard and frightened. I don't believe he did this of his own volition.
I wish people would drop the name calling. This practice was instituted by trump and it has spread like wildfire. It lowers our political discourse and cheapens us as a Nation. Let's heal from the terrors of trump, not perpetuate his nasty ways.
I agree with you, Barbara, both about Graham's appearance and about name calling. I wanted to like Jim Carmichael's comment, but I couldn't because of the Pittypat reference. For me, replacing "Pittypat" with "Graham" makes his comment stronger.
"But there is a response that the current DOJ must take: it must prosecute current and former members of the DOJ who corruptly interfered with the due administration of justice." I wonder how much of what Garland was doing the first year of his AG term was figuring out who was who within. We haven't heard much about senior DOJ people leaving...but there might have been an internal review?
Very good question. Garland and Lisa Monaco just need to prosecute a few of them and the rest will plead guilty to avoid jail. Lisa Monaco was charged with doing they internal investigations of the DOJ when she took office. Two years in, crickets. Perhaps Geoffrey Berman's book will embarrass the DOJ into action--as the January 6th Committee hearings plainly did.
Thank you Lindsey Graham. A huge strategic political error. What's next? Banning apple pie?
Lindsey Graham has remained a Senator by being deft and clever at catching the winds and sensing the prevailing public mood. The introduction of this national abortion ban bill boggles the mind.
Does he really think he will bring more "Evangelical Bible Thumpers" than "Women who Expect Reproductive Freedom" to the voting booths? This is a political gift to Democrats of historic proportions! Who is advising him? It's not McConnell!
As other readers above have noted, this is a strange twist for Graham and directly contrary to prior positions regarding state control. With Graham, you always have to consider the possibility that he is being blackmailed. If so, that is unfortunate on many levels.
Thank you again for your insights, Robert. Have you seen or heard any indication that the DOJ is planning on deposing the accidental ex-president, since he opened that door by filing a civil lawsuit concerning his thefts of government property? He might decide to dismiss. He would severely weaken his flimsy case by asserting his rights not to incriminate himself. I'll bet there are a few DOJ lawyers who would like to question him.
I have not heard of a plan to examine Trump, but you make a very good point. Trump's continued statements in Truth Social may be viewed as a subject matter waiver against self incrimination. (Having written that sentence, i am not certain that such a doctrine exists in the law.) But at the very least, Trump's ramblings on Truth Social are admissions that can be used in court. If he could keep a good lawyer, he would learn that he needs to shut up in order to reduce his jail time.
Yes, incredibly, he continues to stoke the unrest by his "campaigning" theatrics.
I am expecting that once he declares his candidacy, someone will file suit to attempt to bar him from holding office due to his inciting the January 6 insurrection, much as the public office holder in New Mexico was recently removed from office.
And I have to believe that he will never shut up, unfortunately.
You would be surprised how passionate some people are about usage. It's a long discussion, but usage and grammar are descriptive. Many people grew up being told that they are "prescriptive" and they use usage and grammar as a way to enforce classicism. A reader recently told me that my usage of "political" to mean "partisan" (an accepted meaning) indicated a lack of refinement and intelligence.
They should have known not to mess with the SDNY. The Southern District’s US Attorneys’ Office has long been called the “Sovereign District of New York” office because it always operated independently from DOJ in Washington. The SDNY was never motivated by politics. It was widely reported that AUSAs did not resign when TFG came into office—there were no fears at the time that the office would change. Barr messed with the wrong office.
Heard a very interesting and somewhat upsetting interview by Teri Gross yesterday. She interviewed the author of a book (the title evades me) about the law firm of Jones, Day. It goes into detail how the firm recommended conservative federalist attorneys for judgeships to McConnell and the Trump to gain control of the courts. Working together they’ve really put their thumb on the scale of justice. Very scary!!
Reposting comment above: I plan to write about Enrich's book this week. Many BIGLAW firms have partners who facilitated Trump's corruption. Those partners were welcomed back as conquering heroes and given large raises for the "access" they can sell to clients.
For example, Geoffrey Berman's book tells the story of Barr demanding that the SDNY prosecute Greg Craig as political payback to "even things out" for prosecutions of two Republicans in SDNY. Berman refused, telling Barr that Craig was innocent. Barr then "shopped" the political persecution to the US Attorney in DC--Jessie K. Liu, who indicted Craig. A jury acquitted Craig in five hours. Jessie K. Liu has been rewarded with a partnership at Skadden Arps, one of the the worlds largest and most profitable law firms. She is now listed in Chambers as one of the best lawyers in America. The system is broken. Everyone in the legal profession understands what Liu did. No one cares--at least not at the large law firms.
From what I can tell, that is a law firm with a political agenda. My guess is that its attorneys are, up and down the line, in lockstep with the management of that firm and its political agenda. Woe be the liberal new lawyer who accidentally takes a job with that firm. They will be used up and spit out after they give the better part of four or five years of brutal service to the clients and partners of that firm. Whether they have families to go home to when they have to look for a new job is the question.
It was made obvious by the author that top management of the firm had a hard right agenda, but he also stated that the majority of the firm’s attorneys ran the political gamut from right to left.
In composing a letter to Chief inJustice Roberts who has been whining about the Extreme Court being call illegitimate just because people disagree on their rulings, my focus is on how the Robbers Court has abandoned half the citizens, the women, in protecting their fundamental human rights to life and liberty. Where now are the checks and balances against states which are taking away fundamental rights and even putting women into the slavery of forced pregnancy? Where is the very originalists' tenet of Freedom of Religion and the separation of Church and State when states are making laws based on an unprovable notion that a fertilized egg (half of which are washed out of the body naturally) is a person with more right to life than the woman gestating it. Why was the Liberty Clause ignored and not addressed in the arguments in Dobbs? Who is going to enumerate the rights that are not enumerated in the Ninth Amendment ? Who now protects a womens’ rights to life and liberty that some states are taking away? The future of the Independent State Legislatures movement makes this a very pertinent question if even the state Supreme Courts are not allowed to be a check on rogue state legislatures while the U.S. Supreme Court has washed its hands of women’s rights.
Why is the Roberts (or my preference now Robbers) Court abandoning the Constitution and rewriting it in its own image of the chosen few forcing all of us into Alito's world where men who believe in witches rule? We, the People, need to VOTE! -- ALL of us this time!
Interestingly, the Nixon events led directly the adoption of the need to require the bar examinations to include testing on knowledge of the ethical rules of conduct - given how shocking was the behavior of lawyers in covering up the unlawful activities within the Nixon administration. So, folks, here we are about 50 years after every state required attorneys to prove their mettle when it comes to being ethical - and what do we have? Same old, same old. Now lawyers must know the rules of conduct in order to be licensed -- and they must, as part of their oath to be licensed, promise to obey the rules of ethics -- and what do we have? Same old, same old.
Here's the truth: taking an oath to acquire privileges and rights is only as meaningful as the character of the one swearing loyalty and allegiance. Despite our powers of human intelligence, character is its own standard. The law assumes people will act rightly and honorably. And mostly people assume the honor and commitment of the people who have sworn an oath. Foolish us.
Our law schools pump out future lawyers, they teach them the rules of conduct, they help them to pass bar examinations on those principles, they warn that the disciplinary arms of state bar authorities can take their licenses if they breach those rules in any gross way - and then they turn the Josh Hawleys and Ted Cruzes and William Barrs into an example of excellence in the legal field and they go out and do harm with the confidence that nothing bad will befall them.
This lack of respect (and courage) towards fulfilling ethical responsibilities takes place at the lowest level of the legal profession. Don't be fooled into thinking that gross violations and disregard of ethical rules occurs only at the top. The State Bar of California is, in my opinion and that of most good and honorable lawyers, completely impotent when it comes to enforcing the rules of conduct. My guess is that the state bar's failure in California is the same across this country. Just as with democracy, lawyers must willingly comply with their state's rules if they are to mean anything.
Not only do the state bars have no ability to monitor enforcement of ethical rules, but they don't even take action when members of their state bar openly and egregiously act unethically. Hurray for the DOJ, finally! But what of the ABA and the Federalist Society and other bar organizations that honor the actions of unethical lawyers?
The training and licensing of our country's lawyers is often at odds with how they are allowed to behave. State Bars let them get away with horrendous behaviors. This is a situation that seems not to be improving at all.
Thank you, Robert! The plot thickens? My teeny, tiny brain is trying to figure out how a nationwide ban on abortion fosters "small government." But I'm just an ordinary American (who votes)...what do I know!
Meanwhile, latest news is January 6 Select Committee has "goal" to restart public hearings on September 28.
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/house-jan-6-committee-chair-032137912.html
Lynell, I’m thinking that even if you were a whiz kid political scientist you’d be boondoggled trying to decipher the stunts that the GOPers are coming up with.
Thank you, Karen!
just in time for my birthday. Can't wait.
Many happy (future) returns, Bronwyn!
Lynell: Here's a piece that was mentioned in the links in Dr Heather's article of 9/13/22. The R's are claiming the idea of putting the U.S. in line w/Europe's abortion policies. https://donmoynihan.substack.com/p/debunking-the-false-comparisons-between?utm_source=substack&utm_campaign=post_embed&utm_medium=web
Thanks, Barbara. I don't know why they even bother. They'll just make up whatever conclusion that suits them. Just MHO.
If you (and the readers) want an answer to your question about whether there is something fundamentally "off" in the Republican Party, may I highly recommend David Corn's new book, American Psychosis: A Historical Investigation of How the Republican Party Went Crazy - which goes back to 1945 to demonstrate that Truman was right in 1948 when he said during the campaign that "The only 'good Republicans' are pushing up daisies."
You can get it here. Well worth every penny.
https://www.amazon.com/s?k=david+corn+american+psychosis&crid=OVSQOLR5QC0Z&sprefix=David+Cor%2Caps%2C313&ref=nb_sb_ss_ts-doa-p_1_9
Thanks! Always appreciate references to source material
Books can also be ordered through https://www.indiebound.org/ to support independent bookstores throughout the United States
I always buy my books from the Harvard Book Store in Cambridge, MA. I'm supporting a local independent business even from 3,000 miles away.
See my comment above yours.
Your both, of course, right.
Unfortunately, I have to say as an author who pays his bills with his royalty payments, that Amazon always pays on time, so my publisher pays me on time, and unlike B&N and too many independents, doesn't finance their operation on credits for returns - which are charged against the author's account. Amazon sells everything they order.
Sometimes, the "good people" aren't as good as we wish they were.
I'm glad you made this point. I was thinking the other day about the days when every body, and not just farmers markets shoppers picked out their produce and put it in their own baskets/bags. But then I thought, people earn a living at factories that produce packaging and what would happen to them (no worries anytime soon!) That led me to an article on packaging trends - lots of cool concern for the environment. Is it always the case that innovation means some folks will lose their jobs? And others will learn new ones? I wonder how that could be a more just process? I know this is off topic but I actually enjoyed a few moments away from the need to salvage democracy!!
https://www.smithers.com/resources/2019/feb/future-packaging-trends-2018-to-2028
Good interview with David Corn here regarding his new book.
https://www.msnbc.com/morning-joe/watch/how-the-republican-party-came-to-embrace-conspiracy-148319301892
Also good interview by Diane Rehm with David Corn here.
https://dianerehm.org/shows/2022-09-09/drawing-a-line-from-mccarthyism-to-january-6th
HST knew them well
Robert asked about "the collapse of DOJ independence" with so many US Attorneys who "surrendered to Trump’s corrupting influence without a fight or second thought. How is that possible? ...Are law firms responsible for a 'win at all costs' attitude that rewards profit maximation and discourages ethical actions by their partners when they assume government posts (with the expectation that they will return to their firms)."
Bingo! We learned about the Federalist Society wielding the levers of power on behalf of the elite minority. Now we learn about Jones Day, a giant law firm that represents big corporations in the tobacco, pharmaceutical, and gun manufacturing industries, to name a few, that infiltrated the DOJ during the Trump administration.
Alex Wagner on MSNBC had a good interview on 9/13/22 of David Enrich about his new book, "Servants of the Damned" investigating the "often-corrosive power that giant law firms secretly wield over our politics, economy and society." Enrich comments that giant law firms have transformed the legal "profession" into the legal "industry."
https://twitter.com/davidenrich/status/1569663944863760385?s=20&t=jL1x5BnQELT9LLtlzQbpXw
More tales of how moneyed bullies take advantage of "rules," "norms," and "courtesy." Time to firm up the laws, fill in the cracks. Looking forward to informed commentary.
And one of Trump's special master nominees? Paul Huck, Jr., a former partner at the Jones Day firm.
Thanks, Ellie. I plan to write about Enrich's book this week. Many BIGLAW firms have partners who facilitated Trump's corruption. Those partners were welcomed back as conquering heroes and given large raises for the "access" they can sell to clients.
For example, Geoffrey Berman's book tells the story of Barr demanding that the SDNY prosecute Greg Craig as political payback to "even things out" for prosecutions of two Republicans in SDNY. Berman refused, telling Barr that Craig was innocent. Barr then "shopped" the political persecution to the US Attorney in DC--Jessie K. Liu, who indicted Craig. A jury acquitted Craig in five hours. Jessie K. Liu has been rewarded with a partnership at Skadden Arps, one of the the worlds largest and most profitable law firms. She is now listed in Chambers as one of the best lawyers in America. The system is broken. Everyone in the legal profession understands what Liu did. No one cares--at least not at the large law firms.
Thank you, Ellie, for mentioning the new book "Servants of the Damned" by David Enrich. I also watched Alex Wagner's show last night. The behavior of the Jones Day "law firm" stunned and horrified me, despite my knowing that many (all?) large (and some smaller) law firms get paid a fortune to evade the law and even after all the shocking behavior exhibited by TFG since he "descended" upon America.
Here is a quote from their website introduction to the book, by Mr. Enrich's publishers, for anyone who didn't yet hear the author speak.
"The NYT's Business Investigations Editor reveals the dark side of American law.
Delivering a "devastating and rollicking" (Carol Leonnig) exposé of the astonishing power wielded by the world’s largest law firms, David Enrich traces how one firm shielded OPIOID MAKERS, GUN COMPANIES, BIG TOBACCO, THE CATHOLIC CHURCH, RUSSIAN OLIGARCHS, FOX NEWS, and much of the FORTUNE 500; helped DONALD TRUMP get elected, govern, and evade investigation; masterminded the conservative remaking of THE COURTS . . . AND MADE A KILLING ALONG THE WAY." https://www.harpercollins.com/products/servants-of-the-damned-david-enrich?variant=40153396346914
With regard to healthcare, and reproductive healthcare in particular, why doesn’t America come into line with other developed countries and provide universal healthcare?
Abortion is a medical procedure, which some pregnant people electively chose. HOWEVER, HOWEVER, lots of pregnant people wind up having to have an abortion because of significant complications. An ectopic pregnancy NEVER results in a live birth. An incomplete miscarriage has serious implications for the health of the pregnant person. The list of complications is endless and is impossible to predict. Farm animals are treated with more concern than women currently are in a number of states. The Mothers Against Greg Abbott ad illustrates this point way better than I can. Why should state legislators (most of whom are male) get away with practicing medicine without a license? “Pregnancy is too complicated to legislate.” Jessica Valenti
I agree that state legislatures who pass these absolute anti-abortion laws should be sued for practicing medicine without a license! I don't even understand how these legislatures who are majority male have any standing to legislate against women rights. Why does a doctor now have to consult a lawyer before treating her patient?
Are there enough prosecutors in the DOJ
for all of these guys?
Very good question. Garland and Lisa Monaco just need to prosecute a few of them and the rest will plead guilty to avoid jail. Lisa Monaco was charged with doing they internal investigations of the DOJ when she took office. Two years in, crickets. Perhaps Geoffrey Berman's book will embarrass the DOJ into action--as the January 6th Committee hearings plainly did.
From Geo Washington “Few men have virtue to withstand the highest bidder.”
Pittypat really doesn’t seem to have a clue, and that is saying something in a political party that encompasses Lauren Boebert and Marjorie Taylor Greene, Josh Hawley, Mark Meadows, ad nauseam.
Jim-just for clarity-"Pittypat" is Lindsey Graham, yes? I like the comparison.
And has anyone studied PittyPats declining appearance? He looks very off. Kind of like the unkept Steve Bannon progression.
I did notice Senator Graham's appearance during his news conference yesterday. He looked upset, haggard and frightened. I don't believe he did this of his own volition.
I wish people would drop the name calling. This practice was instituted by trump and it has spread like wildfire. It lowers our political discourse and cheapens us as a Nation. Let's heal from the terrors of trump, not perpetuate his nasty ways.
Yes you are correct. “When they go low, we must stay high”. Point well taken. Thank you Barbara.
My Dad said many times: "Never sink to someone's level."
I agree with you, Barbara, both about Graham's appearance and about name calling. I wanted to like Jim Carmichael's comment, but I couldn't because of the Pittypat reference. For me, replacing "Pittypat" with "Graham" makes his comment stronger.
You make a good point on what makes the comment stronger. Jim--we're not piling on! Many people have gotten into the name calling habit.
Such an apt name for him. Miss Pittypat was Charles Hamilton"s silly maiden aunt
(Scarlett's first husband) in GWTW, known for her swooning and unfamiliarity with facts.
"But there is a response that the current DOJ must take: it must prosecute current and former members of the DOJ who corruptly interfered with the due administration of justice." I wonder how much of what Garland was doing the first year of his AG term was figuring out who was who within. We haven't heard much about senior DOJ people leaving...but there might have been an internal review?
Very good question. Garland and Lisa Monaco just need to prosecute a few of them and the rest will plead guilty to avoid jail. Lisa Monaco was charged with doing they internal investigations of the DOJ when she took office. Two years in, crickets. Perhaps Geoffrey Berman's book will embarrass the DOJ into action--as the January 6th Committee hearings plainly did.
Robert, I agree!
Thank you Lindsey Graham. A huge strategic political error. What's next? Banning apple pie?
Lindsey Graham has remained a Senator by being deft and clever at catching the winds and sensing the prevailing public mood. The introduction of this national abortion ban bill boggles the mind.
Does he really think he will bring more "Evangelical Bible Thumpers" than "Women who Expect Reproductive Freedom" to the voting booths? This is a political gift to Democrats of historic proportions! Who is advising him? It's not McConnell!
As other readers above have noted, this is a strange twist for Graham and directly contrary to prior positions regarding state control. With Graham, you always have to consider the possibility that he is being blackmailed. If so, that is unfortunate on many levels.
Thank you again for your insights, Robert. Have you seen or heard any indication that the DOJ is planning on deposing the accidental ex-president, since he opened that door by filing a civil lawsuit concerning his thefts of government property? He might decide to dismiss. He would severely weaken his flimsy case by asserting his rights not to incriminate himself. I'll bet there are a few DOJ lawyers who would like to question him.
I have not heard of a plan to examine Trump, but you make a very good point. Trump's continued statements in Truth Social may be viewed as a subject matter waiver against self incrimination. (Having written that sentence, i am not certain that such a doctrine exists in the law.) But at the very least, Trump's ramblings on Truth Social are admissions that can be used in court. If he could keep a good lawyer, he would learn that he needs to shut up in order to reduce his jail time.
Yes, incredibly, he continues to stoke the unrest by his "campaigning" theatrics.
I am expecting that once he declares his candidacy, someone will file suit to attempt to bar him from holding office due to his inciting the January 6 insurrection, much as the public office holder in New Mexico was recently removed from office.
And I have to believe that he will never shut up, unfortunately.
Oye vey! Chomping, champing, who cares? Let's get our priorities straight, people! Curb your obsessive-compulsive enthusiasm. The world's on fire!
You would be surprised how passionate some people are about usage. It's a long discussion, but usage and grammar are descriptive. Many people grew up being told that they are "prescriptive" and they use usage and grammar as a way to enforce classicism. A reader recently told me that my usage of "political" to mean "partisan" (an accepted meaning) indicated a lack of refinement and intelligence.
They should have known not to mess with the SDNY. The Southern District’s US Attorneys’ Office has long been called the “Sovereign District of New York” office because it always operated independently from DOJ in Washington. The SDNY was never motivated by politics. It was widely reported that AUSAs did not resign when TFG came into office—there were no fears at the time that the office would change. Barr messed with the wrong office.
Heard a very interesting and somewhat upsetting interview by Teri Gross yesterday. She interviewed the author of a book (the title evades me) about the law firm of Jones, Day. It goes into detail how the firm recommended conservative federalist attorneys for judgeships to McConnell and the Trump to gain control of the courts. Working together they’ve really put their thumb on the scale of justice. Very scary!!
Reposting comment above: I plan to write about Enrich's book this week. Many BIGLAW firms have partners who facilitated Trump's corruption. Those partners were welcomed back as conquering heroes and given large raises for the "access" they can sell to clients.
For example, Geoffrey Berman's book tells the story of Barr demanding that the SDNY prosecute Greg Craig as political payback to "even things out" for prosecutions of two Republicans in SDNY. Berman refused, telling Barr that Craig was innocent. Barr then "shopped" the political persecution to the US Attorney in DC--Jessie K. Liu, who indicted Craig. A jury acquitted Craig in five hours. Jessie K. Liu has been rewarded with a partnership at Skadden Arps, one of the the worlds largest and most profitable law firms. She is now listed in Chambers as one of the best lawyers in America. The system is broken. Everyone in the legal profession understands what Liu did. No one cares--at least not at the large law firms.
From what I can tell, that is a law firm with a political agenda. My guess is that its attorneys are, up and down the line, in lockstep with the management of that firm and its political agenda. Woe be the liberal new lawyer who accidentally takes a job with that firm. They will be used up and spit out after they give the better part of four or five years of brutal service to the clients and partners of that firm. Whether they have families to go home to when they have to look for a new job is the question.
It was made obvious by the author that top management of the firm had a hard right agenda, but he also stated that the majority of the firm’s attorneys ran the political gamut from right to left.
Servants of the Damned by David Enrich. Thanks for the heads up. I will listen to Fresh Air later.
In composing a letter to Chief inJustice Roberts who has been whining about the Extreme Court being call illegitimate just because people disagree on their rulings, my focus is on how the Robbers Court has abandoned half the citizens, the women, in protecting their fundamental human rights to life and liberty. Where now are the checks and balances against states which are taking away fundamental rights and even putting women into the slavery of forced pregnancy? Where is the very originalists' tenet of Freedom of Religion and the separation of Church and State when states are making laws based on an unprovable notion that a fertilized egg (half of which are washed out of the body naturally) is a person with more right to life than the woman gestating it. Why was the Liberty Clause ignored and not addressed in the arguments in Dobbs? Who is going to enumerate the rights that are not enumerated in the Ninth Amendment ? Who now protects a womens’ rights to life and liberty that some states are taking away? The future of the Independent State Legislatures movement makes this a very pertinent question if even the state Supreme Courts are not allowed to be a check on rogue state legislatures while the U.S. Supreme Court has washed its hands of women’s rights.
Why is the Roberts (or my preference now Robbers) Court abandoning the Constitution and rewriting it in its own image of the chosen few forcing all of us into Alito's world where men who believe in witches rule? We, the People, need to VOTE! -- ALL of us this time!
Exactly right: Why was the Liberty Clause ignored and not addressed in the arguments in Dobbs?
Think I need to go study the dissenting arguments on Dobbs and see if they mentioned the Liberty Clause.
Here is Justice Kagan criticizing Chief Justice Roberts. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/09/14/kagan-speech-supreme-court-legitimacy-roberts/
Interestingly, the Nixon events led directly the adoption of the need to require the bar examinations to include testing on knowledge of the ethical rules of conduct - given how shocking was the behavior of lawyers in covering up the unlawful activities within the Nixon administration. So, folks, here we are about 50 years after every state required attorneys to prove their mettle when it comes to being ethical - and what do we have? Same old, same old. Now lawyers must know the rules of conduct in order to be licensed -- and they must, as part of their oath to be licensed, promise to obey the rules of ethics -- and what do we have? Same old, same old.
Here's the truth: taking an oath to acquire privileges and rights is only as meaningful as the character of the one swearing loyalty and allegiance. Despite our powers of human intelligence, character is its own standard. The law assumes people will act rightly and honorably. And mostly people assume the honor and commitment of the people who have sworn an oath. Foolish us.
Our law schools pump out future lawyers, they teach them the rules of conduct, they help them to pass bar examinations on those principles, they warn that the disciplinary arms of state bar authorities can take their licenses if they breach those rules in any gross way - and then they turn the Josh Hawleys and Ted Cruzes and William Barrs into an example of excellence in the legal field and they go out and do harm with the confidence that nothing bad will befall them.
This lack of respect (and courage) towards fulfilling ethical responsibilities takes place at the lowest level of the legal profession. Don't be fooled into thinking that gross violations and disregard of ethical rules occurs only at the top. The State Bar of California is, in my opinion and that of most good and honorable lawyers, completely impotent when it comes to enforcing the rules of conduct. My guess is that the state bar's failure in California is the same across this country. Just as with democracy, lawyers must willingly comply with their state's rules if they are to mean anything.
Not only do the state bars have no ability to monitor enforcement of ethical rules, but they don't even take action when members of their state bar openly and egregiously act unethically. Hurray for the DOJ, finally! But what of the ABA and the Federalist Society and other bar organizations that honor the actions of unethical lawyers?
The training and licensing of our country's lawyers is often at odds with how they are allowed to behave. State Bars let them get away with horrendous behaviors. This is a situation that seems not to be improving at all.
I think if you make your living serving the institution instead of those in front of you, slowly you rot.