Lawyer Kickers pro bono

In the Public's Benefit - Installment 2011-1

2011-04-21T15:27:00.000-07:00

Brooklyn, New York, lawyer Jason Goldfarb, 32, admitted today to taking part in what the U.S. says is one of three Galleon Group LLC insider-trading rings. Goldfarb, pled guilty to conspiracy and securities fraud before U.S. District Judge Richard Sullivan in Manhattan.

Goldfarb (Brooklyn Law School) was accused of conspiring with ex-Galleon trader Zvi Goffer to pay tens of thousands of dollars to Arthur Cutillo and Brien Santarlas, lawyers at Boston-based Ropes & Gray LLP, for information about transactions their firm was working on.

As part of the plea agreement, Goldfarb won’t be prosecuted further by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York, except for any potential criminal tax violations, according to a copy of the pact.

Goldfarb's plea raised to 20 the number of defendants who've done so in what authorities call the largest hedge fund insider trading case ever.

Goldfarb was arrested in 2009 in connection with the Galleon Group hedge fund prosecution. Galleon's founder, Raj Rajaratnam, is currently trial now. Prosecutors claim the Wall Street insider used "corporate spies" to get rich off inside trades. He insists he was merely a savvy investor.

According to Wikipedia (today), Federal Election Commission records indicate Rajaratnam made over $75,000 in political contributions in the past five years. He has also contributed to the Democratic National Committee and various campaigns on behalf of Hillary Rodham Clinton, Charles Schumer, and Robert Menendez.

....................................................^ ^ ^

Why pick on law schools?

Law schools do not seem to compete for the public's benefit; school reputations currently connote to the public vague expectations of how brazen and arrogant their graduates may behave, rather than the innate integrity of their respective graduates.

Improving law school admissions standards, although certainly in the public interest, is highly unlikely. After all, law schools are not military academies and most lawyers were never Eagle Scouts nor recipients of Girl Scout equivalent Gold Awards.

Why pick on lawyers?

A disproportionate percentage of law graduates (hardly 2% of the entire workforce) are currently elected to over 20% of public offices (including 60% of the U.S, Senate and 100% of the U.S. Supreme Court). This presents conflicts of interest and publicly unintended concentrations of authority. Combined with self-serving laws tailored to give incumbents subtle advantages over challengers, the country is in growing peril of a permanent political class.

Meanwhile, proceeds of the underlying crimes are certainly adequate to provide corruptive influences in government at every level.

Flagrant Abuse and/or Quid Pro Quo?

2011-02-11T13:05:00.000-08:00

Would this payback smell so bad for a profession other than lawyers? There can be little doubt that it would.

Background

Of the twenty top donors to President Obama during his 2008 election cycle, 4 organizations were law firms who funnelled money from the organizations' PACs, partners or employees and subsidiaries. Each of the four law firms contributed in excess of $490,000 according to OpenSecrets.org.

In addition, 4 universtiies with renowned law schools (Harvard, Columbia, Stanford and the University of California) contributed over $520,000 each. Finally, our US Government, not quite as rife with atttorneys at the time as today, funnelled about $500,000.

In summary, 8 of Obama's top 20 donors including the largest (the University of California with $1,591,395) are tied overtly to the legal profession.

Middle Class Quid Pro Quo?

The Department of Labor has more attorneys than any other department besides the Department of Justice, sources note. VP Biden says that this new ABA government program is part of his Middle Class Initiative.

In an unprecedented and controversial move, the White House has launched a new program at the Department of Labor which will refer workers who havecomplaints about their bosses to a toll free number at the American Bar Association, where they can get a lawyer to work on their case on a contingency fee basis. ...

The White House has also enlisted the ABA to launch a toll-free hotline number at the Department of Housing and Urban Development to help homeowners with foreclosure issues, as well as a separate ABA toll free number to help veterans at the Department of Veterans Affairs, too.

Vice President Joe Biden noted that the lawyers will be working on a contingency fee basis, and not pro bono. Joy, middle class!

No Disbarment Applies #2

2011-01-17T13:45:00.000-08:00

Since May 26, 2005, the following quotation has appeared above in Lawyer Kickers pro bono's header:

Well-connected local people probably don't get prosecuted as much. That's just endemic in government, including lawyers and judges. People don't like to prosecute their friends. - Professor John Corkery of the James Madison Law School in Chicago

By way of a possible example, last month we posted No Disbarment Applies, a rather convoluted result by the Board on Professional Responsibility on whether a lawyer who, by pleading guilty in 2005 to making a false entry in financial records (a federal record-keeping crime), violated D.C.’s moral turpitude law. The board found on December 09, 2010, that violating the federal law did not, on its face, run afoul of the D.C. moral turpitude law.

Any citizen harboring reservations about that outcome, may be a bit more concerned with one handed down more recently.

January 13, 2011 D.C. Appeals Court: Attorney May Have Stolen Funds, But Doesn’t Deserve Disbarment, in which Exceptional Circumstances were cited in accordance with:

We have said that even where a lawyer has engaged in intentional misappropriation of funds, a sanction less than disbarment may be appropriate "in extraordinary circumstances," Addams, 579 A.2d at 191, or "[o]nly in the most stringent of extenuating circumstances," id. at 193 (quoted in In re Pennington,921 A.2d 135, 141 (D.C. 2007)). Previously we have found "extraordinary circumstances" only where the respondent's misconduct was shown to be caused by a disabling addiction, such as chronic alcoholism, see In re Kersey,520 A.2d 321, 326-27 (D.C. 1987), or depression, see In re Verra,932 A.2d 503, 505 (D.C. 2007). We have not otherwise defined what will constitute "extraordinary circumstances," but have noted that "it is appropriate for the court to consider the surrounding circumstances regarding the misconduct and to evaluate whether the mitigating factors are highly significant and [whether] they substantially outweigh any aggravating factors such that the presumption of disbarment is rebutted." Addams, 579 A.2d at 195.

Lawyer Hewett, who was represented by Ronald Douglas, assistant dean for student services at North Carolina Central University School of Law, argued that disbarment was not appropriate because there was no “evidence of fraud, self-dealing, misrepresentation, conflict of interest, or any pattern of inappropriate conduct.”

“[A]lthough we agree with Bar Counsel that Willie Hewett intentionally misappropriated funds, we conclude that the facts of this case – in particular that the motivation for the misappropriation was protection of the client’s interest – present the type of “extraordinary circumstances” in which disbarment is not the appropriate sanction,” Judge Vanessa Ruiz wrote.

RESULT: A six-month suspension stayed in favor of probation was determined more fitting punishment than outright disbarment. Ruiz also ordered Hewett to reimburse Jewell’s estate in the amount of interest accrued while he was in possession of the misappropriated funds.

Lawyer Kickers pro bono sees a pattern of inappropriate conduct. Consider whether a neighbor, relative or non-lawyer of the veteran (client) had committed the same misappropriation of funds from the veteran as the lawyer and claimed the same extraordinary intention: to deplete the veteran's bank account to maintain Medicaid eligibility.

a) If the extraordinary circumstances rule is unobtainable by non-lawyers, separate law applied to lawyers only seems to hold their misappropriations above the law applicable to ordinary citizens.

Or, on the contrary...

b) If courts allow the lawyer's precedent to apply to similar misappropriations by ordinary citizens, the decision creates a defense for theft because fraud, self-dealing, misrepresentation, and conflict of interest are difficult to prove.

Either way, the lawyer's conduct seems to involve an inappropriate pattern for the community by an officer of the court (role model of respect for the law).

Latest Leaker

2011-01-06T14:39:00.000-08:00

Back in 2006, we had quoted Howell Raines, former executive editor of the New York Times, who shared some tantalizing, insiders' knowledge with an audience at the Aspen Institute, an international organization dedicated to "fostering enlightened leadership, the appreciation of timeless ideas and values, and open-minded dialogue on contemporary issues."

When one audience member asked Raines about the role of media leaks, Raines offered up some arcane information of his own::

"Almost all leakers are lawyers. That's the bottom line."

We have not attempted to compile the law degree status of every leaker since 2006, but we have checked the latest:

WASHINGTON- Thu Jan 6, 2011 4:27pm EST by James Vicini (Reuters) Ex-CIA officer charged with giving reporter secrets - A former CIA officer was arrested on Thursday on charges of illegally disclosing national defense information about Iran to a New York Times reporter who wrote a book.

Sterling, a lawyer who worked at the CIA from 1993 to 2002, was arrested in St. Louis near where he lives.From 1998 through mid-2000, he was assigned to a classified clandestine program that conducted intelligence activities about the weapons capabilities of certain countries, the Justice Department said in announcing the indictment against Sterling.

Perhaps the CIA's Security Section should take more of an interest in reading our 2006 posting. Oh, well. We realized it is currently politically incorrect to avoid grief by rational means. Unfortunately, resultant grief always adds job security for members of the bar.

No Disbarment Applies

2010-12-18T13:15:00.000-08:00

Since the May 26, 2005, inception of Lawyer Kickers pro bono, the following quotation has appeared above in our header:

Well-connected local people probably don't get prosecuted as much. That's just endemic in government, including lawyers and judges. People don't like to prosecute their friends. - Professor John Corkery of the James Madison Law School in Chicago

...............................................................................................
Readers may find the following outcome interesting, if not credulity-stretching.

It involves a lawyer who, by pleading guilty in 2005 to making a false entry in financial records, avoided retrial on securities and bank fraud charges. Adelphia Communications Corporation founded by his father went bankrupt after the father and another son pilfered millions of dollars from the company and hid its debt from investors, prosecutors had alleged.

Father and son Timothy were convicted in June 2005. The father was sentenced to 15 years in prison. Timothy received a 20-year sentence. They lost an appeal in 2007.

Following the plea of the second son, a lawyer named Michael, the Court of Appeals in 2005 ordered the Board on Professional Responsibility to investigate whether he had violated D.C.’s moral turpitude law when he committed the federal record-keeping crime. The board found that violating the federal law did not, on its face, run afoul of the D.C. moral turpitude law, and referred the case to a hearing committee for full investigation to determine whether relevant facts supported a finding of moral turpitude.

The Court of Appeals found that “a formal contested hearing” by a hearing committee to determine whether the lawyer had committed moral turpitude “would be of little benefit.” It found that since the federal criminal proceeding had not determined that the lawyer-son knowingly signed false documents (a finding needed for moral turpitude), a separate inquiry by a hearing committee was not necessary.

On December 09, 2010, before the hearing committee conducted its full investigation, the D.C. Bar Counsel reached an agreement with Michael to a one year’s suspension of his law license.

OUTCOME (more): Rather than being disbarred, lawyer-son Michael was merely sanctioned for one year.

The Lawyer-Political Complex

2010-08-28T07:42:00.000-07:00

The Military-Industrial Complex is but one subset of the Lawyer-Political Complex. If operations of the former are manifestly dangerous, what can be said of the latter?

The extent of influence available to and exercised by members of the legal profession surpass those of any other profession except organized crime in its heyday. While law grads comprise only 2-3% of the U.S. workforce, their collegial network extends to the highest levels of every important economic activity, including our defense establishment and government.

The system of checks and balances envisioned by framers of the U.S Constitution has been hobbled by infiltration of lawyers into career politics. When one profession exercises effective control over all three branches of government, as lawyers now do, the stakes for our republic are unnecessarily high.
The fedural judiciary is staffed, and headed by lawyers; 60% of U.S. Senators are lawyers; the House is comprised of 36% - 40%, and currently the president, vice-president, Majority and Minority Leaders of both the Senate and House are all lawyers.

Chairman of key congressional investigating and ethics committees (wielders of hidden, but threatening power) and at least half of their committee members are lawyers. The Hobbs Act defines extortion as: “the obtaining of property from another, with his consent, induced by wrongful use of actual or threatened force, violence, or fear, or under color of official right.” – 18 U.S.C. § 1951.

Property belonging taken under “official right” from a congressman by an ethics investigation might include unspent campaign funds and his seat, for starters.

Moreover, the wishes of citizens able to vote once every 2, 4 and 6 years often take a back seat to unelected lobbyists who provide travel and 'educational' influences to congress at least 240 days a year. The vast majority of lobbyists just happen to be law grads. They are members of the vast, unseen power network in which lawyers of all stripes must establish careers.

The average voter, blind to the facts described above, sees nothing upsetting about the power lawyers exert on each other and non-lawyer elected politicians who won’t go along with them.

No profession could long maintain a network this powerful and remain free of deep corruption. Ideally, no politician should be allowed to make a career of elected office, and lawyers should be elected to office in numbers closer to their actual representation in the general workforce. Of course, that is left to conscientious citizens who exercise their right to vote.

In the Public's Benefit - Installment 2010-2

2010-07-07T13:03:00.000-07:00

From 2000 through 2006, attorney Steven M. Coren and several of his client-contractors defrauded government agencies by falsely representing that the contractors’ workers were being paid the prevailing wage as required by the federal Davis-Bacon Act and New York State Labor Law. On March 20, 2009, Coren pled guilty to a sixteen-count indictment charging him with scheming to defraud government agencies in connection with his clients’ construction contracts with those agencies, conspiring to launder the funds wrongfully obtained from those agencies, and obstructing the federal grand jury investigation by directing one of his clients to destroy documents related to the scheme.

Coren's scheme involved more than $10,000,000 in contract payments from various agencies for projects including 18 New York City public schools and 20 public housing projects. Over the course of the scheme, two contractors alone diverted over $750,000 in funds due employees.

Coren, who was sentenced to 30 months in prison in February, admitted he had advised a client to destroy a computer flash drive that could have been used in a federal investigation. Today it was been announced that the federal crimes of which Coren was convicted were sufficient to trigger his automatic disbarment from practice in New York State.

.......................... ....... ..........^ ^ ^

Why pick on law schools?

Law schools do not seem to compete for the public's benefit; school reputations currently connote to the public vague expectations of how brazen and arrogant their graduates may behave, rather than the innate integrity of their respective graduates.

Improving law school admissions standards, although certainly in the public interest, is highly unlikely. After all, law schools are not military academies and most lawyers were never Eagle Scouts nor recipients of Girl Scout equivalent Gold Awards.

Why pick on lawyers?

A disproportionate percentage of law graduates (hardly 2% of the entire workforce) are currently elected to over 20% of public offices (including 60% of the U.S, Senate and 100% of the U.S. Supreme Court). This presents conflicts of interest and publicly unintended concentrations of authority. Combined with self-serving laws tailored to give incumbents subtle advantages over challengers, the country is in growing peril of a permanent political class.

Meanwhile, proceeds of the underlying crimes are certainly adequate to provide corruptive influences in government at every level.

Contradicting a Lawyer: Worst US Environmental Disaster Definitely Not from an Oil Well

2010-05-30T14:00:00.000-07:00

The Gulf of Mexico oil spill is the worst environmental disaster the US has faced, a senior Obama official has said. Carol Martha Browner, Director of White House Office of Energy and Climate Change Policy in the Obama Administration and a lawyer, called the Gulf spill, which started April 22, “probably the worst environmental disaster we’ve ever faced in this country,” and said that it was being met with “the biggest environmental response.”

Very interesting and WRONG! How can anyone contradict Ms. Browner?

Is there a larger environmental disaster in the US? Yes, but lawyers naturally blame private business and industry, the source for most of the parasitic fees they collect, funds they exploit, and insurance claims built into the prices of products they intend to litigate eventually rather than governments. If there is an even larger environmental disaster looming, why is the public relatively unconcerned about it?

First, because the handmaiden of government, the mainstream media, does so little reporting to remind the public. Secondly, because the government has done something about the larger ecological disaster -- legislated laws to fix it by 2024 (still indefinite). Thirdly, it is not private businesses that have been the culprits in the larger environmental disaster, it is municipal governments like New York and Washington, D.C., etc.

Government data released Thursday suggests some 19 to 30 million gallons of oil have poured into the Gulf. Taking the worst case, that is 750,000 gallons daily, a large quantity to be sure, but not as large as the real culprit.

A Gathering Storm - New York Wastewater Infrastructure in Crisis -... one-quarter of the 610 facilities in New York are operating beyond their useful life expectancy and many others are using outmoded, inadequate technology, increasing their likelihood of tainting our waters... Every year, old sewers flooded by stormwater release more than 27 billion gallons of untreated sewage into the New York Harbor alone.

Every year, old sewers flooded by stormwater release more than 27 billion gallons of untreated sewage into the New York Harbor alone... An inadequate sewage treatment infrastructure jeopardizes the viability of current and future businesses, stymies economic growth and threatens the quality of life for New York State residents. - 2010 New York State Department of Environmental Conservation

Washington: Agreement On Storm Runoff - [2004]
The District of Columbia, in a settlement with federal environmental officials, agreed to build a $1.4 billion underground storm water storage system over the next 20 years to prevent raw sewage from entering rivers during heavy storms, the Justice Department said. The agreement should stop the annual discharge of an estimated 3.2 billion gallons of untreated sewage into the Anacostia and Potomac Rivers and Rock Creek. Eric Lipton (NYT)
For just D.C. and NY alone, the raw sewage flowing from rivers to the ocean is over 30 Billion gallons per year (average of over 82 Million gals/day). In addition to fecal coliform and disease, other pollutants may include pharmaceutical trace drugs, nickel, copper, zinc, cadmium, lead and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). See what I mean, now which do believe is really the larger environmental disaster?

82 Million gallons /day of raw sewage is 100x more than 750 Thousand gallons / day of raw oil, and it ain't good for shrimp, oysters, seafood, and fishermen either.

Are lawyers accustomed to say only that which helps those paying them? Absolutely, with practice and testing provided by Law Schools.

Lawyers' Network Quote of the Quarter

2010-05-03T14:11:00.000-07:00

April 23, 2010 - The new United States Attorney for the District of Columbia, Ronald C. Machen Jr., spoke recently at the American Bar Association. Addressing a laughing crowd of defense attorneys, prosecutors and other law school grads Machen said,

“The more indictments, the more business you get.”

They should be laughing, as taxpayers it is we who foot the bills for court costs and $billions of legal fees. Is concentration of authority by elected lawyers, appointed judges and the networked legal profession a threat to the U.S. Treasury?

You be the judge...
The Legal Services Corporation (LSC) is a private, non-profit corporation established in 1974 by the United States Congress to seek to ensure equal access to justice for all by providing civil legal assistance to those who otherwise would be unable to afford it (and job security for lawyers).

On April 2o this year, the presidents of 61 state and territorial bar associations and their counterparts at five national bar associations sent Congress a request for increased LSC funding. The request urged lawmakers to add at least $15 million in new funds, giving the LSC a budget of $435 million.
.
In the midst of the nation's financial crisis (March 2009), a Senate lawyer introduced the Civil Access to Justice Act, a bill reauthorizing the LSC and increasing its funding level to $750 million. The Senate lawyer was Tom Harkin - J.D, Columbus School of Law, 1972.
.
The LSC has resisted reforms because it was designed by LAWYERS to avoid external controls. In affect, it takes public funds (your tax dollars) and transforms them into private funds (LAWYER INCOME), $335,282,000. in FY 2005. The Heritage Foundation has alleged that "Unfortunately, taxpayer-funded legal groups, under LSC, engage in political, lobbyist, and cause-advocacy activities, often at the expense of providing real legal services needed by poor people."
.
In the United States, scholars have analyzed the Legal Services Corporation in terms of the choice between pursuing appellate cases, which might change rules, such as trying to get the housing rules changed through litigation, and pursuing cases that will solve immediate problems of poor clients, such as stopping an eviction. Criticism of the choice to pursue appellate cases colored the opposition to the Legal Services Corporation and lead to its losses in the Reagan administration. (Budget had been $400,000,000) What can this mean? Check out these outrages, here.

In the Public's Benefit - Installment 2010-2

2010-04-29T11:06:00.000-07:00

Former Dallas attorney and SEC trial lawyer Phillip W. Offill, Jr. was sentenced last Friday to eight years in federal prison for his role in penny stock scams. He had been convicted in Virginia on nine counts of wire fraud and a single count of conspiracy.

Offill's conviction focused on a classic "pump-and-dump" operation that manipulated share prices in dozens of small companies by faxing and e-mailing advertising to investors. Offill profitted by selling shares when prices rose. related story
.
The government wants Offill to forfeit assets and cash totaling $4.8 million for his crimes. Offill claims he owes only $125,700 from ill-gotten gains.

..............................................^ ^ ^ ^
Why pick on law schools?

.
Law schools do not seem to compete for the public's benefit; school reputations currently connote to the public vague expectations of how brazen and arrogant their graduates may behave, rather than the innate integrity of their respective graduates.

.
Improving law school admissions standards, although certainly in the public interest, is highly unlikely. After all, law schools are not military academies and most lawyers were never Eagle Scouts nor recipients of Girl Scout equivalent Gold Awards.

.
Why pick on lawyers?

.
A disproportionate percentage of law graduates (hardly 2% of the entire workforce) are currently elected to over 20% of public offices (including 60% of the U.S, Senate and 100% of the U.S. Supreme Court). This presents conflicts of interest and publicly unintended concentrations of authority. Combined with self-serving laws tailored to give incumbents subtle advantages over challengers, the country is in growing peril of a permanent political class.

.
Meanwhile, proceeds of the underlying crimes are certainly adequate to provide corruptive influences in government at every level.

Lawyers and Waterboarding

2010-02-20T15:10:00.000-08:00

The primary reason unionized (ABA) American trial lawyers oppose waterboarding is based upon the adverse impact its acceptance would have on their lucrative law practices.

Imagine if the OPR (Office of Professional Responsibility lawyers) had instead decided waterboarding was a permissable form of truth extraction, rather than a vile method of torture. Since waterboarding leaves no lasting bodily harm, defendants including corrupt officials and well-heeled politicians (many of whom, of course, might themselves be lawyers) would be made to confess crimes, implicate others and share secrets such as Islamist clientelle.

Some day, we might also have look forward to waterboarding not only of boardroom execs like ENRON’s vermin, but of Arthur Andersen's lawyer, who recommended shredding those culpatory client documents.

In the Public's Benefit - Installment 2010-1

2010-01-27T09:38:00.000-08:00

Attorney Scott W. Rothstein ( Nova Southeastern University's Law School – J.D., 1988) this morning pleaded guilty to all five counts against him in what prosecutors have described as South Florida’s largest investment scam totaling $1.2 billion.
.

Rothstein agreed to forfeit the entire $1.2 billion, including 24 parcels, luxury cars, boats, jewelry, sports memorabilia, business interests and bank accounts, much of which had been auctioned off on Saturday.

"Today's guilty plea is an important step in bringing to justice those who perpetrated a $1.2 billion Ponzi scheme under the guise of operating a legitimate law firm," said U.S. Attorney Jeffrey H. Sloman.

Last month, Rothstein was charged with five counts of racketeering, fraud and money laundering. According to court records, he admitted to operating a criminal enterprise through which he and others fraudulently obtained money from investors through bogus investments and other schemes between 2005 and November 2009.

Sentencing has been set for May 6. Rothstein faces up to 100 years imprisonment.

..............................................^ ^ ^ ^

Why pick on law schools?

Why pick on lawyers?

A disproportionate percentage of law graduates (hardly 2% of the entire workforce) are currently elected to over 20% of public offices (including 60% of the U.S, Senate and 100% of the U.S. Supreme Court). This presents conflicts of interest and unintended concentrations of authority. Combined with self-serving laws tailored to give incumbents subtle advantages over challengers, the country is in growing peril of a permanent political class.

Meanwhile, proceeds of the underlying crimes are certainly adequate to provide corruptive influences in government at every level.

In the Public's Benefit - Installment 2009-4 update

2009-11-16T12:17:00.000-08:00

Former Rep. William Jefferson has been sentenced to 13 years in federal prison. According to Jefferson's lawyer, his sentence is the longest ever handed down to a congressman for public corruption. Jefferson was found guilty of taking more than $478,000 in kickbacks in return for helping to arrange business deals in Africa. Under federal sentencing guidelines prosecutors had had sought a 27 - 33 year sentence for Jefferson.

Jefferson was convicted last August on 11 of 16 federal charges of bribery, fraud, money laundering, and racketeering. He became the first sitting member of Congress to be charged with violating the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.

In December, 2008, we had posted Law Schools Do Not Seem to Compete for the Public's Benefit contending that Law school reputations currently connote to the public only vague expectations of how brazen and arrogant its graduates behave.

Law school admission standards must be tightened for the entire public to better rely on reputations of respective law schools for producing graduates of innate integrity.

Jefferson earned his J.D. from Harvard Law School in 1972, and a LLM in Taxation from Georgetown University Law Center in 1996. This time a highly-placed, corrupt lawyer has shamed two law schools.

Stay tuned. Shamed law schools will continue to be identified to awaken the public:

In the Public's Benefit - Installment 2009-5

2009-08-29T08:56:00.000-07:00

Attorney Robert Simels (New York Law School – J.D., 1974) became a convicted felon late this month, under 12 counts -- including bribery of a witness, attempted witness tampering and conspiracy to commit witness tampering -- due to his efforts to prevent potential witnesses from testifying against his client, Guyanese drug-smuggler Shaheed "Roger" Khan. Mr. Simels' former associate, attorney Arienne Irving (SUNY- Buffalo) , was convicted of five of 11 counts, including attempted witness tampering and conspiracy to commit witness tampering.

At this writing, Simels's online biography includes these MEMBERSHIPS AND COMMITTEE POSITIONS:
Association of the Bar of the City of New York - Criminal Justice Operations Committee; Professional Discipline Committee; Professional Responsibility Committee; Chairman, Forfeiture Committee – N.Y.S. Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers; Corrections Committee, National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers; Faculty member - NITA; Faculty member - Practicing Law Institute; Federal Bar Council; ABA

In December, 2008, we had posted Law Schools Do Not Seem to Compete for the Public's Benefit contending that Law school reputations currently connote to the public only vague expectations of how brazen and arrogant its graduates behave.

Law school admission standards must be tightened for the entire public to better rely on reputations of respective law schools for producing graduates of innate integrity.

Improving law school admissions standards, although certainly in the public interest, is highly unlikely. After all, law schools are not military academies and most lawyers were never Eagle Scouts nor recipients of Girl Scout equivalent Gold Awards.

We expected, to be posting with increasing frequency about the brazen corruption and ethical lapses of lawyers in public office. The latest felon is has been a member of the U.S. House. The kind of dough those not in public office could afford to throw around could certainly influence some in public office:

Shamed law schools will be identified to awaken the public. Stay tuned.

Guess Who is Fighting Consumer Identity Theft Protections by Corporate Guardians

2009-08-28T10:15:00.000-07:00

Lax security of personal data files kept by organizations increasingly exposes individuals to the risk of identity theft. Since 2005, for example, the Privacy Rights Clearinghouse has registered over 900 data breaches caused by US companies and government agencies. Over 200 million records containing sensitive personal information, like social security numbers, were involved.

After 1998 testimony from industry groups, the FTC agreed to self-regulating restrictions on access to credit reports information:

The Commission encourages the credit card industry to pursue perpetrators of identity theft and the consumer reporting agencies to continue to work with consumer victims to ensure the accuracy of their records. The Commission also believes that consumer victims need to be formally recognized as crime victims, complete with rights of restitution. The Identity Theft and Assumption Deterrence Act of 1997 should go a long way toward lessening the harm identity theft inflicts on innocent consumers.

Fast forward to 2009 RESULT: ID-Theft Ring Ensnares Even the Fed Chairman

More currently (From the BLT: The Blog of LegalTimes),

The American Bar Association is suing the Federal Trade Commission in federal district court in Washington to block enforcement of regulations that require businesses and organizations that act as "creditors" to establish a program for preventing identity theft, The National Law Journal reports. Lawyers, doctors and other professionals are included in the FTC's definition of creditors because customers are billed after services are provided. The ABA is challenging that interpretation.

Thanks again, American Bar Association, you do so much to (select the answer that fits best):
a) please lawyer-politicians supported by corporate lobbyists
b) assure the job security of your membership
c) both a) and b)
d) inhibit the growth of national crime patterns

Which of the above, American Bar Association, is "not your job"? ans.: d)

In the Public's Benefit - Installment 2009-4

2009-08-06T17:50:00.000-07:00

William Jennings "Bill" Jefferson (HARVARD LAW - 1972) is now a convicted felon and the 3rd high-profile lawyer to be found guilty of felony (after Joseph P. Collins and Marc S. Dreier), since July 11, 2009. Two of the villains are HARVARD LAW graduates.

In December, 2008, we had posted Law Schools Do Not Seem to Compete for the Public's Benefit contending that Law school reputations currently connote to the public only vague expectations of how brazen and arrogant its graduates behave.

Law school admission standards must be tightened for the entire public to better rely on reputations of respective law schools for producing graduates of innate integrity.

Improving law school admissions standards, although certainly in the public interest, is highly unlikely. After all, law schools are not military academies and most lawyers were never Eagle Scouts nor recipients of Girl Scout equivalent Gold Awards.

We expected, to be posting with increasing frequency about the brazen corruption and ethical lapses of lawyers in public office. The latest felon is has been a member of the U.S. House. The kind of dough those not in public office could afford to throw around could certainly influence some in public office:

Shamed law schools will be identified to awaken the public. Stay tuned.

In the Public's Benefit - Installment 2009-3

2009-07-16T12:44:00.000-07:00

A continuing series on lax admissions and/or ethics standards for major U.S. lawschools ...

Law Schools Do Not Seem to Compete for the Public's Benefit. Law school reputations currently connote to the public only vague expectations of how brazen and arrogant its graduates behave. Law school admission standards must be tightened for the entire public to better rely on reputations of respective law schools for producing graduates of innate integrity.

Improving law school admissions standards, although certainly in the public interest, is highly unlikely. After all, law schools are not military academies and most lawyers were never Eagle Scouts nor recipients of equivalent Girl Scout Gold Awards.

We expect to post with increasing frequency about brazen corruption and ethical lapses of convicted lawyers. Lax law schools will be overrepresented and identified to awaken an unsuspecting public.

A disproportionate percentage of law graduates (hardly 2% of the entire workforce) are currently elected to over 20% of public offices. This presents conflicts of interest and unintended concentrations of authority. Combined with self-serving laws tailored to give incumbents subtle advantages over challengers, the country is in growing peril of a permanent political class.

The latest remarkable example of lawyer malfeasance involves one not in public office. With the kind of dough he could afford to throw around, however, he could certainly influence some in public office:

Sentencing is set for Nov. 3rd for attorney Joseph P. Collins, formerly a partner of Mayer Brown LLP. UPDATE: The United States Department of Justice, Southern District of New York - The sentencing in United States v. Collins, S1 07 Cr. 1170 has been adjourned until January 8 at 10:00 a.m.

Mr. Collins was found guilty of conspiracy, two counts of securities fraud and two counts of wire fraud. Collins, a lawyer for Refco Inc., was convicted on conspiracy and fraud charges Friday in a scheme helping owners and executives at the defunct commodities broker steal more than $2 billion by concealing material financial woes.

Mr. Collin's Law School: New York University, J.D., 1975

Warning: Never blindly vote for another lawyer, regardless of party affiliation.

The Public's Benefit - Installment 2

2009-07-09T12:40:00.000-07:00

In December, 2008, we posted Law Schools Do Not Seem to Compete for the Public's Benefit contending that Law school reputations currently connote to the public only vague expectations of how brazen and arrogant its graduates behave.

Law school admission standards must be tightened for the entire public to better rely on reputations of respective law schools for producing graduates of innate integrity.

Improving law school admissions standards, although certainly in the public interest, is highly unlikely. Afterall, law schools are not military academies and most lawyers were never Eagle Scouts nor recipients of Girl Scout equivalent Gold Awards.

We expected, to be posting with increasing frequency about the brazen corruption and ethical lapses of lawyers in public office. The shamed law schools will be identified just in case the more serious allegations stick to awaken the public. A disproportionate percentage of law graduates (hardly 2% of the entire workforce) are currently elected to over 20% of public offices. This presents conflicts of interest and unintended concentrations of authority. Combined with self-serving laws tailored to give incumbents subtle advantages over challengers, the country is in growing peril of a permanent political class.

The latest remarkable example of lawyer malfeasance involves one not in public office. With his Harvard pedigree and the kind of dough he could afford to throw around, however, he could certainly influence those in public office:

A well-heeled New York lawyer termed a Houdini of impersonation and false documents pled guilty to a scheme that cost investors and hedge funds at least $400 million. The lawyer, Marc S. Dreier, is a Harvard Law graduate who sold $700 million worth of bogus promissory notes to investors, according to his federal indictment. The New York Times reported yesterday that federal prosecutors have recommended a 145-year sentence for lawyer Dreier. Of course, determination of Mr. Dreier's sentence will be left up to another lawyer --- a judge.

Hopefully, the sentencing judge will also be an emBARrassed Harvard law grad.

Sotomayor and the Supreme Court Paradigm

2009-05-28T11:22:00.000-07:00

Seating Judge Sonia Sotomayor on the Supreme Court could well be required for a feat not anticipated in our lifetimes, although certainly provided by the framers of our constitution, — seating non-lawyers on that court.

Sotomayor may weigh her life experiences, as she has stated, to reach judicial opinions some interpret at conflict with the Constitution and case law to date. This would not be the first time, nor would it always lead to favorable outcomes for Sotomayor’s opinions. Dissenting or not, she would be subject to the razor-sharp pressure from her peers.

The longstanding monopoly of an entire branch of the federal government by lawyers, the majority of the U.S. Senate, including its Judiciary Committee, and over 30% of the U.S. House of Representatives by members of a single profession is outrageous on its face. Although such concentrations of authority breed conflicts of interest, most voters cannot see the results.

A scandal with tentacles and ensuing investigation will someday confirm the unconscionable conflicts of interest enabled by lawyers, particularly with unelected enablers like well-heeled lobbyists or worse, lawyer-filled not-for-profits like the A.C.L.U. , A.C.O.R.N.

Like it or not, seating Sotomayor may finally provide that reliance on case precedent and the written letter of the law (i.e. the claimed necessity for jurists' formal legal education) is not so necessary. Voila! We want to see some commoners on our Supreme Court.

Environment of Corruption, Yet?

2009-05-20T11:31:00.000-07:00

Inspector General David Kotz uncovered the possible insider trading. Kotz declined CBS's formal request for an interview, citing the ongoing investigation. As related in SEC Attorneys Probed For Insider Trading, Kotz later told CBS News:

"The report talks about our concerns that there is no true compliance system at the SEC."

The SEC has had no compliance system in place to monitor the trades of their employees.

Both attorneys - who deny any wrongdoing - still work at the SEC and make six-figure salaries. The investigation was triggered after the high volume of trades by the female attorney set off alarms inside the agency. ...
In addition, the (pdf) report says that the female attorney “spent much of her work day e-mailing and searching the Internet about stocks.” It quotes her telling investigators: "It's my main hobby. It's my passion.” And: “It’s my way of keeping intellectually above what other people are doing.”
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If corruption is present at an enforcement and regulatory agency populated largely by members of the legal profession, what must conflicts of interest be like in a federal goverenment populated largely by members of the same profession?

Let's not forget, the ethical tone of a nation is set by its role models, the leaders.

To corporate watchdogs, audit CPAs and their lawyers, the SEC has set the ethical tone since 1934. Look at today's economy; has the SEC's ethical tone been any more effective than Fannie Mae's?

Wasn't it Arthur Andersen's in-house counsel who advised the ENRON auditors to shred their workpapers? Yes, indeed.

Now, another lawyer:

Ex-Ernst & Young Partner Convicted of Insider Trading

May 15 (Bloomberg) -- James Gansman, who was a partner at Ernst & Young LLP, was convicted of six federal insider-trading charges.

A federal jury in Manhattan today also acquitted Gansman of three insider-trading counts and conspiracy. He faces more than 20 years in prison when sentenced Oct. 1. He is free on bail. His accomplice, Donna Murdoch, a managing director at a Philadelphia-based broker-dealer, pleaded guilty in December.

Warning: Never blindly vote for another lawyer, regardless of party affiliation.

Law Schools Do Not Seem to Compete for the Public's Benefit

2008-12-09T22:20:00.000-08:00

A public corruption expert reminds us that it is not unusual for public officials to choose friends or associates when making appointments.

The two things that are unusual about this case, he said, referring to Blagojevich, are one, the high level of the official, and two, the apparent brazenness and openness of the alleged incident. - George Brown, law professor, Boston College; December 10,2008, In the old days, buying a Senate seat was not unusual, By David G. Savage, Los Angeles Times

On December 9, 2008, Illinois Gov. Blagojevich was arrested by federal law enforcement agents. The governor has been charged with conspiracy to commit mail and wire fraud as well as solicitation of bribery.[6]

Gov. Blagojevich earned his law degree from Pepperdine University School of Law in 1983.

On June 4, 2007, a federal grand jury indicted Rep. William Jennings "Bill" Jefferson of Louisiana on sixteen charges related to corruption.[3]

Jefferson earned a law degree from Harvard University in 1972, and an LLM in Taxation from Georgetown University Law Center in 1996.

One might think prestigious law schools would devote significant portions of their curricula to the ethics of elected governmental office and that largely, only those lawyers with pre-eminent ethics qualifications would run for public offices.

Not only would strengthened ethics courses for lawyers raise the bar for public office, it would also cement the reputational stakes of various law schools in the performance of their graduates.

Ultimately, law school admission standards would have to be tightened, and the entire public could better rely on the reputations of each law school for producing graduates with integrity. Law school reputations currently connote to the public only vague expectations of how brazen and arrogant its graduates behave.

Such improvements in the public interest are highly unlikely. We expect, therefore, to be posting with increasing frequency about the brazen corruption and ethical lapses of lawyers in public office. The shamed law schools will be identified just in case the more serious allegations stick.

Why pick on lawyers? To awaken the public. A disproportionate percentage of law graduates (hardly 2% of the entire workforce) are currently elected to over 20% of public offices. This presents conflicts of interest and unintended concentrations of authority. Combined with self-serving laws tailored to give incumbents subtle advantages over challengers, the country is in growing peril of a permanent political class.

In our opinion, freshening and balancing this mix would be much healthier for our country.

Conflicting Interests and Concentration of Authority Just Grew

2008-11-08T22:22:00.000-08:00

What happened nationally in the November 2008 election?

- Lawyers retained uncontested, total control of the federal judiciary.

- Lawyers took over total control of the executive branch, which nominates and appoints judges and justices, and breaks Senate ties.

- Lawyers increased their numbers in Congress, which creates huge Environmental Superfunds, Bailout and Carbon Offset Funds, etc. feeding members of their own profession. Trial attorneys are among the largest Democrat campaign contributors, and 98% of those lobbying Congress day in and day out are lawyers.

How long can the press remain silent as voters ignore such outrageous conflicts of interests?

As Lee Muller reminds us, A significant number of major figures in the press are lawyers, or ar married to lawyers who practice in the political arena.

We can certainly include in the significant number some very familiar mouthpieces such as Charlie Rose, Bill Moyers (both of whom are graduate lawyers) and Kathleen Parker, who married one.

Are There Too Many Lawyers in the U.S.?

2008-09-16T19:08:00.000-07:00

Associate Justice Antonin Scalia of the Supreme Court has served more than 20 years. In a recent interview Parade Magazine Intelligence Report asked, You’ve said that there are too many lawyers in the U.S. Why do you think that?

Scalia replied, I don’t mean to criticize lawyers, just the need for so many lawyers. Lawyers don’t dig ditches or build buildings. When a society requires such a large number of its best minds to conduct the unproductive enterprise of the law, something is wrong with the legal system.

Ed.: Could lawyers be colonizing [euphemism for corrupting] the Senate and parasitizing the economy?

Is there a role for politics in our judicial system?

Scalia replied, None whatever. The absolute worst violation of the judge’s oath is to decide a case based on a partisan political or philosophical basis, rather than what the law requires.

Ed.: What Scalia was not asked and did not say is that the preponderance of these parasites in elected office is dangerous. Consider whether it would be wise to elect barbers to over half the seats in the U.S. Senate and then have them exercise advice and consent over appointments of barbers to a separate but equal Supreme Tonsorial Salon.

The concentration of power in a single profession is more than monopolistic, it tends to be corrupting and fosters self-serving results. We are unwittingly creating a nobility within a country created expressly, among other purposes, to ban a noble class.

The Supreme Court, by the way, would better represent America if it had a few barbers or hairdressers among its lawyers. By the way, appointment of only lawyers to the Supreme Court is not a requirement of any law, it is one of the results of too many lawyers in government.

Lawyers Infesting Government: The New 'Organized Crime Racket"

2007-11-18T20:47:00.000-08:00

September 14, 2006, in Lawyer Kickers pro bono, we posted 'Lawyers Wield Their Extortion (Threat of Lawsuits), Again'.

Fourteen months later an esteemed member of the nation's journalist community has finally joined in the alarm. Here are some excerpts of what George Will wrote:

Since 1965, the firm has won, often by tactics indistinguishable from extortion, $45 billion from corporations — more than $1 billion a year for plaintiffs claiming to have been cheated as investors. ... It has been indicted as a "racketeering enterprise" that obstructed justice and committed perjury, bribery and fraud while collecting about $250 million in fees from about 250 cases using paid plaintiffs, which is illegal. [emphasis added]

Readers should note that racketeering enterprise laws were developed to quash 'organized crime syndicates' that is, traditional organized crime. George Will's column is worth reading in full and it is great to have someone from mainstream journalism extol the danger of lawyers' infestation of our government: EARLY WARNING: Colonization of the Senate.

We must wait six years for every chance to vote for a non-lawyer senator. Should we not be more frightened that lawyers occupy 100% of the Judiciary, infest 53% of the Senate and often control the Whitehouse than we were when the Mafia controlled a few cities? According to George Will (in his same column):

Lerach was a Lincoln Bedroom guest in President Bill Clinton's White House. Shortly after Lerach attended a White House dinner, Clinton vetoed legislation that would have restricted class-action lawsuits. Lerach gave $100,000 to Clinton's presidential library. ... Until Lerach pleaded guilty, he was a fundraiser for Edwards, for whom he collected $64,000 from lawyers in the firm he founded after he had a falling-out with Weiss.

Time grows short, fellow citizens.

Another loophole by lawyers for lawyers

2007-05-10T20:19:00.000-07:00

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) characterized as crucial to the "pump-and-dump" fraud a lawyers opinion that newly issued stock could be traded immediately, despite a general rule that bars such trading of unregistered shares. source: Norris, Floyd; the International Herald Tribune; May 3, 2007

The SEC described letters proffering such an opinion provided by David Stocker, a Phoenix securities lawyer, for 4 companies as a pretext for issuing millions of shares of purportedly unrestricted stock.

The shares were sold for millions of dollars to suckers who received spam e-mails touting the companies. Stephen Luscko of Sarasota, Florida, and Gregory Alphonse Neu, of Boca Raton, Florida, used the legal opinions to generate stock sales. Each has been sentenced to 5 years in prison.

As if that were not upsetting enough, it appears that the only instances in which the SEC brings civil cases against lawyers providing bogus opinions comes if such lawyers profit directly from sales of unregistered shares (as opposed to from legal fees collected up front). No cases have been brought against lawyers who simply issued such opinions.

Action against lawyers who issue bogus opinions but do not trade shares is very difficult. Don't forget, most state legislatures are highly populated by trial lawyers, who make the laws this way. In the U.S. Congress (House and Senate) the status is much the same with lawyers comprising upwards of 33% and over 50%, respectively. Want to take this problem to the Supreme Court? Of course, there you will encounter 100% lawyers called Justices.

One more thing; "white collar" crime statutes and collegiality among lawyers assures that convicted lawyers usually receive light sentences for major thefts. Very, very convenient for lawyers, yet nonconspiratorial. The Mafia wishes they were above the law, also.

Democratic Party Is Run by Lawyer-Operators according to famous LAWYER

2007-03-15T12:01:00.000-07:00

A recent New York Times Op-Ed Column reminds us what Harvard luminary and leading political commentator, Michael Kinsley, himself a LAWYER, observed about the leadership of the Democrat Party:

On July 25, 1981, Michael Kinsley published an essay in The New Republic called “The Shame of the Democrats.” The Democratic Party, the young Kinsley wrote, is viewed “with growing indifference.” It is run “by lawyer-operators with no commitment to any particular political values.” It is filled “with politicians who will do or say anything for a word or a dollar of support.” [emphasis mine]

Sometimes, even the obvious, unflattering truth will be confirmed by an unabashed member of the obfuscation class.

Kinsley's quote is on a par with the one in Lawyer Kickers pro bono's banner:
"Well-connected local people probably don't get prosecuted as much,'' said professor John Corkery of the James Madison Law School in Chicago. "That's just endemic in government, including lawyers and judges. People don't like to prosecute their friends.''

Red Flag: Profiling the U.S. Elite

2006-12-08T11:16:00.000-08:00

Who actually wields power in our country? Are lawyers loyal to their political parties, or collegial to each other? The facts are presented without comment. If you see no alarming pattern, perhaps you would benefit from one or two small refreshers.

The Iraq Study Group

Republican Lawyers
James A. Baker III .....U. of Texas School of Law _'57 .......... USMC 2 years
Alan K. Simpson ..........U. of Wyoming Law School _'58 ........ No Military
Sandra Day O'Connor .... Stanford Law School ......_'52 ......... No Military
Edwin Meese III .............UC-Berkeley Law........... _ '58......... No Military

Democrat Lawyers
Vernon E. Jordan, Jr. .....Howard U. Law School _ '60 .......... No Military
Leon E. Panetta ..............Santa Clara U. Law School _'63 ....... US Army 2 years
Charles S. Robb ...............U. of Virginia Law school _'73 ....... USMC note 1
Lee H. Hamilton ...............Indiana U. Law School _ _'58 ........ No Military

The Non-Lawyers
Lawrence S. Eagleburger (R)... Yugoslav Ambdr for Carter (D) ..... No Military
William J. Perry ......Secretary of Defense under Bill Clinton (D).....No Military

note 1 Chuck Robb's military service: "During the 1960s Senator Robb served on active duty with the United States Marine Corps, retiring from the Marine Corps Reserve in 1991. He began as the Class Honor Graduate from Marine Officers Basic School in 1961 and ended up as head of the principal recruiting program for Marine officers in 1970. In between he served in both the 1st and 2nd Marine Divisions and his assignments included duty as a military social aide at the White House and command of an infantry company in combat in Vietnam."

other sources: http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2006/12/06/america/NA_GEN_US_Iraq_Commission_Members.php
http://www.usip.org/isg/

Does the Litigation Industry Get More Aggressive?

2006-11-28T20:57:00.000-08:00

The web site reads:

Welcome to LawAdvance.com
Are you involved in a pending or settled lawsuit but cannot wait until it pays you? LawAdvance.com offers you cash advances on your lawsuit in order to give you the resources you need to maintain a stable lifestyle.

____________________________________________________________

What about the defendant's stable lifestyle? This is why tort reform in the United States is unfinished business. If the defendant is a corporation, what about the employment prospects and pensions of its employees? Trial lawyers and judges don't care, and we are about to find out again, soon.

Lawyers will eventually sue every corporation with deep pockets like termites attack your home, mercilessly. IRAs and 401ks will be decimated like those that held tobacco stock.

Global warming suits against our utilities are currently in abeyance, but the party lead by trial lawyers is attaining power again. Kiss your retirement savings goodbye, or vote to end egregious class action suits and require losing plaintiffs to pay all court costs.

A Big Push for "Human Sacrifice" in 21st Century

2006-10-08T22:32:00.000-07:00

In ancient times human sacrifice was an archaic habit of shamanistic cultures and mystical knowledge-men.

Today, a less sanguine equivalent is promoted as a modern con. Who must make the sacrifice? Wage earners, pensioners and utility ratepayers will. Who will rob these honest toilers? Lawyers, of course, and shaman like Al Gore. Will a derivative class benefit? Of course, those "scientists" and academics (federal grant addicts) who continually produce supportive studies will be rewarded with perpetual grant monies, while more objective scientists and academics will be cut off from further grants.

How will this burden be redistributed? Unnecessary investments in equipment will be required by utility plants (ratepayers foot those bills), corporations will be forced into bankruptcy by confiscatory legislation and contrived damage litigation, pensions will dry up, but lawyers and their shamen will be wealthier than ever. The U.S. economy will be sacrificed at the expense of payoffs by foreign entities to our politicians (particularly Senate lawyers of either party).

Those who actually make and collect these sacrifices will never live long enough to see that it had not been necessary. The coffers and political fortunes of those wielding the power, however, will be enriched by the honest toilers.

Cyclical warming and cooling has been a feature of our planet's history for at least the last 700,000 years. Warm periods may last 10-20,000 years. The Holocene that humans have been experiencing between major ice ages is now 13,000+ years old.

It is safe for charlatans to claim dire problems and require confiscatory sacrifice, because average people are ignorant of planet history and will die well before the next ice age arrives.

By now, you must have guessed that the name of the con is human-induced global warming.

What a scam. How dishonest, even for politicians! [Adapted from Molten Eagle]

Senate's Lawyer Infestation Spreads: JAG Lawyers Seek to Dominate "Chain of Command"

2006-09-26T09:30:00.000-07:00

First, critics [1] [2] [3] have pointed out that, under U.S. law, an attack against a military target [USS Cole attack October 12, 2000] does not meet the legal definition of terrorism (see: 22 USC § 2656f(d)(2)).

Then, JAG lawyers prevented strikes against prime terror targets such as the Taliban convoy near Kandahar (October 2001).

Now, from former Captain USNR (ret.) and Attorney EagleSpeak (Vietnam, Desert Storm & Balkans service) in his Sept. 19, 2006 The development of the "Combat Defense Lawyer" (excerpts):

As each trooper in the 82nd lines up a shot at a terrorist aiming at him, one set of the 666th CDAB attorneys will file a motion with the Combat Field Judge asserting that the trooper is about to violate the rights of the jihadist at whom he is aiming. The trooper's counsel will point out the imminent danger faced by his client and will assert "self defense" - meanwhile, the jihadist is blazing away at the trooper, ignoring the temporary injunction papers being waved at him by the Combat Marshal.

Other members of the terrorist group are gunning down members of the 666th Brigade as they try to present their business cards and establish an attorney-client relationship. Eventually the terrorists run out of ammunition only to discover that their AK-47s have not come close to being able to damage the American military as will the legal system about to invoked on their behalf by American law. - EagleSpeak commenting on BRENDAN MINITER's Wall Street OpinionJournal September 19th piece, When Miranda Met Osama Will terrorists get lawyers the moment they're captured on the battlefield? Read it all here.

Interesting facts about the numerical proliferation of JAG lawyers in the combat chain of command since daya of the Continental Army are available here Parasitization of the U.S. Military and at sources linked there.

Lawyers Wield Their Extortion (Threat of Lawsuits), Again

2006-09-14T13:05:00.000-07:00

Another Taxpayer-reimbursed Money Pot Created

Worried CIA Officers Buy Legal Insurance
Over the past two decades, tort suits across the country have increased by 13 percent each year, to cite one statistic. The rising tide of litigation includes lawsuits against federal officials. At any given time, there are about 5,000 active suits against federal employees, said John Euler, retired deputy director of the Justice Department’s Civil Division Torts Branch. The Justice Department accepts about 98 percent of the requests to represent individual federal employees each year, said Charles Miller, a Justice Department spokesman. But that leaves 2 percent without Justice Department representation... Fault Lines: Executives face more liability issues as suits against government increase source

Since the late 1990s, the CIA's senior managers have been eligible for reimbursement of half their liability insurance premium. The insurance, costing about $300 a year, would pay as much as $200,000 toward legal expenses and $1 million in civil judgments.

As part of the administration's efforts to protect intelligence officers from liability, Bush last week called for Congress to approve legislation drafted by the White House that would exempt CIA officers and other federal civilian officials from prosecution...Bush also asked Congress to bar federal courts from considering lawsuits by detainees who were in CIA or military custody that allege violations of international treaties and laws governing treatment of detainees.
The proposals are generally opposed in the Senate by Democrats (mostly lawyers) and a group of dissident Republicans (mostly more lawyers). source

The more lawyers in government, the more opportunities for lawsuits are created and funded (by us taxpayers).

Had You Always Suspected This, Too?

2006-07-22T10:46:00.000-07:00

Howell Raines, ex-New York Times executive editor resigned in 2003 in the aftermath of the Jayson Blair scandal. Recently, Raines discussed his memoir: "The One That Got Away: A Memoir" at the Aspen Institute.

When one of the audience asked Raines about the role of media leaks, Raines offered some tantalizing, insiders' knowledge:

"Almost all leakers are lawyers. That's the bottom line."

He said "leakers," not whistleblowers. This description cannot be taken as a compliment to the lawyer element, regardless of dilution.

Prominent Law Firm & Powerful Lawyers Indicted for Class Action Frauds

2006-05-19T00:32:00.000-07:00

In a 20-count indictment against Milberg Weiss Bershad & Schulman LLP, often called the most prominent class-action securities law firm in the nation, and partners David Bershad and Steven Schulman prosecutors charged that they illegally paid portions of nearly $250 million in fees over a 20-year period to clients who had agreed to act as plaintiffs to the suits.

The charges include perjury, bribery and obstruction of justice in more than 150 lawsuits against corporations.

As usual, the lawyers are Democrat Party contributors and claim political motive. Remember, lawyers by training are "paid liars" and actually, U.S. Attorney Debra Wong Yang stated Thursday that the case came to light in 1999 under the Clinton administration. It seems that a Beverly Hills ophthalmologist, one Steven Cooperman, facing unrelated fraud charges, alerted prosecutors about the kickbacks in hopes of receiving a plea agreement.

Quoting Reuters: "The widening government probe also was expected to open the door for a score of rivals in the world of shareholder litigation, long dominated by Milberg Weiss and its scorched-earth tactics. By its own account, Milberg Weiss has won more than $45 billion in its suits against corporations.

Three Milberg clients named in the indictment allegedly received more than $11 million in illegal kickbacks from the firm. One of those clients, Howard Vogel, agreed recently to plead guilty to charges stemming from the case and cooperate with prosecutors as part of a plea agreement."

Of course, no one has been convicted yet. Before that happens, you may wish to review Lawyers as Parasites (Infestations Ofthebar and More) and in case of aquittal, Legal Theft: When Lawyers Win, Retirees, Workers, and Taxpayers Lose.

I hope now that you understand the endemic problem with a party lead by LAWYERS and 2 of the 3 branches of our government dominated by lawyers. Isn't it time yet to stop electing most of them?

Congressional Pension Reform: Dead on Arrival?

2006-03-06T22:52:00.000-08:00

Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts, is sponsoring a bill denying pensions to former legislators, like Randy “Duke” Cunningham, convicted of bribery, conspiracy and other major ethics crimes. Cunningham was recently sentenced to serve eight-years and four-months after conviction on charges of soliciting and taking bribes:

Sen. Kerry pointed to the fact that lawmakers convicted of most crimes short of treason or espionage remain eligible for pensions. Cunningham's conviction will not deprive him of “a perk most Americans only dream of – a $40,000-a-year pension, courtesy of taxpayers.”

Another great reform idea that is long overdue, almost everyone would agree. Kerry, a LAWYER, has never been noted for sponsoring any legislation. In fact, lack of sponsorship was a major criticism of his feckless Senate record during his '2004 presidential campaign.

What is happening here? It is called posturing. Any bill that would penalize white collar crime (the kind lawyers most often commit) is Dead on Arrival in the U.S. Senate, currently infested with 53 lawyers, and Kerry knows it. Sponsorship may finally allow Kerry bragging rights in the next campaign, however.

Watch the bill be voted down in bipartisan fashion. Senate lawyers are a collegial bunch. Ahem.
Hat tip: Lone Ranger

Money Laundering 101 – By Lawyers for Lawyers

2006-02-03T02:05:00.000-08:00

WASHINGTON, Feb. 2 Democrats Call for Special Prosecutor in Lobbying Case

Most Senate Democrats called on the Justice Department today to appoint a special prosecutor to take over the criminal investigation centered on the Republican lobbyist Jack Abramoff, who has pleaded guilty to conspiring to corrupt members of Congress and other public officials. The Senate Democratic leader, Harry Reid [ed. received $47,000 laundered money] of Nevada, said he signed the letter because "we need an independent investigation, not a whitewash led by Attorney General Gonzales, President Bush's best friend."

Here is the Washington Post’s detailed graphic of who received what. In summary, the party in power got $3.4 million mostly unlaundered, and the Democrats got $1.9 million – all money laundered.

Let's see if we can draw a realistic parallel to direct and indirect money:

Jack Abramoff (lawyer-lobbyist, not a bank robber) gave funds directly to some Republicans. Some Democrats, however, received their money after it was laundered through other organizations. Sure am glad we can trust those Democrat lawyers to remove the taint on something.

Many of you are having trouble with the term money laundering applied to lawyers, so here is a quick primer, also from yesterday's (February 2, 2006) news:

Prominent L.A. Attorney Pleads No Contest

LOS ANGELES (AP) - A prominent attorney pleaded no contest Thursday to using a false name while making political contributions to the election campaign of former Mayor James Hahn in 2000 and 2001, officials said. Pierce O'Donnell, 58, was accused of collecting $25,500 in political contributions from employees and associates and then reimbursing them.

Here is what the news article DID NOT say:
+ Both Pierce O’Donnell (ostensibly) and Mayor Hahn are DEMOCRATS
+ Both O'Donnell and Hahn are LAWYERS, and
+ What O’Donnell pleaded No Contest to is called MONEY LAUNDERING

The problem IS bipartisan. The culprit, Abramoff, like 98% of lobbyists, is a LAWYER. Any questions?

Are You Watching Yet? Democrats' Lobbying Reform: Great Idea, Dead on Arrival

2006-01-15T12:26:00.000-08:00

WASHINGTON (AP) - Sen. Harry Reid of Nevada and Rep. Nancy Pelosi of California, are scheduled to announce Wednesday a sweeping plan to tighten Congress' code of conduct. The Democrats signaled their intention of making ethics an issue in the 2006 elections, since lobbyist Jack Abramoff tainted many seated members of the current UY.S. Congess.

Surprisingly, the plan would be true, long overdue reform. Molten eagle, an independent voter, even agrees with the main points lealed to date:

+ banning lobbyists' gifts to lawmakers including meals, tickets to sporting or entertainment events and travel.

+ cracking down on slipping special interest provisions into legislation in the 24 hours prior to passage. In the Senate, it has not been unusual for key lawmakers seeking additional votes for their bill to insert last-minute changes. Pelosi and Reid intend to call for curbs on the practice, requiring that printed copies of legislation, including last-minute amendments, be given to all lawmakers 24 hours before a vote, officials said.

+ doubling the current one-year moratorium on ex-lawmakers and senior aides before they are allowed to lobby without restriction.

The above reforms are a long overdue start for meaningful reform. It will never happen, however. Lobbyists are a special constituency for bi-partisan shennanigans to undo the public will. Over 90% of lobbyists are lawyers . The Democrat party is run by and for lawyers.

Nancy Pelosi, not a lawyer, will have her own reaction to defeat of this measure. Watch for it. It should be telling, as it will come from both sides of the aisle. Too bad for ordinary American voters!

Deciding What Tax Is Fair

2006-01-04T20:28:00.000-08:00

Lone Ranger recently posted The "Fair Tax" Pfffft , his well-written opinion of the Fair Tax scheme proposed by two of Georgia’s finest, talk show host Neil Boortz and Congressman John Linder. I urge you to read LR’s thoughtful opinion.

The following was my response to this delightful professional:

Out of curiosity, I found Mr. Boortz passed the bar before graduating from law school in 1977, and had practiced law up until signing his contract with WSB in 1992. Congressman John Elmer Linder, though not a lawyer, had been a practicing dentist (at least painful extraction seems common to both professions).

On the topic of expected fraud, you are mostly correct, but you probably understate the magnitude of the actual fraud expectation. The largest threat to the proposal would be the sudden rise of bartered goods under a "gray market" economy.

In 1985, the U.S. Treasury was aware that the "undergeound economy" was so huge that if properly taxed, it would have wiped out the deficit in one year (if memory serves, about $800B). Although political correctness has changed the name of the u.g. economy, the numbers today are even larger. Your question of how the government could assure compliance, therefore, seems very convincing in the negative.

Although I believe a lower federal sales tax is preferable to today's Byzantine income tax regulations, I favor exemptions for food, clothing, medicine, etc., as long as they are domestically produced.

Finally, the founding fathers understood implicitly that our Federal government (a monopoly) should tax only to pay for duties and obligations it alone is best suited to conduct (e.g. defense). Otherwise, states should handle locally and tax as necessary. Of course, people would be free to move to states with less onerous and more equitable taxation schemes. Sounds a little like competition, doesn't it?

You May Have Missed The Real Marine Barracks Story

2005-12-11T10:45:00.000-08:00

Sunday morning, October 23, 1983, 6:20 AM - The deadliest single-day death toll for the United States Marine Corps since the Battle of Iwo Jima in World War II. The attack remains the deadliest post-World War II attack on Americans overseas. The death toll was 220 Marines, 18 Navy personnel, and 3 Army soldiers. Scores of Americans were also injured.

A suicide bomber had detonated his truck, containing 12,000 pounds of TNT at the Beirut barracks, where the United States Marines had their local headquarters. The explosion collapsed the four-story cinder-block barracks to rubble, crushing many inside. The FBI later concluded that the blast was the largest non-nuclear explosion they had ever seen.

From Leatherneck.com (November 01 2005) DOD Lawyers and Politicians Are At It Again! (emphasis added):

"When the suicide truck with its massive IED approached the Marine facility, the ROE (ed. Rules of Engagement) prevented the Marine guards from having rounds "locked and loaded" in their weapons. Unlike the Army guard whose quick reaction and superb aim killed the driver of the cement truck IED in Baghdad this week, the Marine sentries at the barracks were unable to respond in time."

"Grunts are being disciplined for exercising their "inherent right of self-defense" because it doesn't fit some E-ring lawyer's view of "reasonable use of lethal force."

"Two Marine officers recently returned from Iraq have lifted the Wizard's curtain, revealing that DOD lawyers and politicians (military and civilian) are a major contributing factor in the increased casualties being experienced by US forces (particularly in the Sunni areas)."

Readers are urged to read the full posting by Ellie, from which above have been excerpted.

Related: What Should We Have Expected from a Lawyer?

Global Warming: The Phoney Distraction from Real Crisis

2005-12-11T10:09:00.000-08:00

Originally posted at Molten Eagle

More and more critical thinkers have abondoned the hyped crisis called Global Warming due to weak, contradictory and trumping evidence. Do your own homework, and decide for yourself.

This is about the crisis actually confronting first and second world governments. Why not include the poorer, third world governments? They will be effected deeply as their benefactors suffer, but not directly -the longevity in these countries is generally too short to suffer the direct impact of Alzheimer's Disease.

Although Alzheimer's can afflict 20-yearolds, that is very rare. The likelihood of developing Alzheimer’s almost doubles every five years after age 65. At 85, the risk becomes almost 50 percent.

The June 26, 2001 report from the Centers for Disease Control showed a doubling of deaths from Alzheimer's disease, adding further urgency to "this mounting public health crisis, which demands an immediate response." At a time when the numbers of other age-related deaths are decreasing, Alzheimer's keeps increasing. Today, two of every five people know someone suffering from Alzheimer's. This statistic will double in the coming five years, due to demographics (people living longer in larger numbers since WWII).

Who do we know that work well into old age? Lately, it does seem everyone, but historically politicians are most noted for their long "service". This crisis is personally concerning to politicians for that special reason alone. When Clinton left office, the annual national cost of caring for AD patients was estimated to be slightly over $50 billion (Leon et al., 1998).

Is there a cure or preventative in sight? No, but there seems to be an ozone connection to Alzheimer's. Lightning creates ozone; it strikes the Earth 20 million times a year and cannot be stopped by mankind.

What should government leaders do? The last thing any government wants is to create a panic by relating Alzheimer's to CJD (the human version of bovine spongiform encephalitis or mad cow disease). The pathologies are as similar as the symptons. What some politicians believe is needed is a phoney crisis to distract people, a crisis that will appear to be managed with good results (positive results could be demonstrable in 5 years, though not verifiable for hundreds or longer.

Politicians quietly sign up to Global Warming as their white horse, because they are as brilliant an environmentalist as Al Gore, as honest as John Kerry, as honorable as Ted Kennedy, as confused as John McCain, or because they go along with the pack. Scientists, who originally conceived the GW possibilty for early investigations, now need it for lifelong job security.

Oh, yes. Lawyers will be the major winners (again), if the U.S. signs up to GW, because the stage would be set for to sue corporations that then would appear remiss, laggardly or criminal. The impacts will be a transfer of wealth to the parasite class (trial lawyers), higher utility rates and prices for consumers, job losses for tens of thousands of American workers as their employers are forced into bankruptcy, related pension losses for retirees, and even larger contibutions to U.S. Senators from American Trial Lawyer political organizations.

2005-10-03T13:50:00.000-07:00

Harriet Miers must be honored by President Bush's nomination to Associate Justice. The nomination conveys Bush's trust, as well as Miers competence and loyal service, even though Miers donated $1,000 to Al Gore's 1988 presidential campaign, according to Federal Election Commission reports. Lawyers do this to cover all bases, however.

As president of Texas's State Bar, Harriet Miers also urged the American Bar Association 1n 1993 to place abortion on a referendum to the group's full membership, arguing that the ABA should remain neutral on abortion. This will cause Democrats to oppose the nomination with full force -perhaps the filibuster (use of extreme delaying tactics to prevent action especially in a legislative assembly). If it comes to a filibuster:

+ Republicans garner time to express the conservative position
+ The nuclear option could be invoked

Miers is 60, a bit older than the ideal age of other candidates (54-55). She will be a lightning rod for Bush, a satisfactory token for the religious right, and a win for Republicans, whether she makes it to SUPCO or not.

The best aspect of Miers is the paradigm busting nature of her nomination: she has never been a judge. That paves the way for the next step: someone who has never been a lawyer!
The Constitution doesn't require that Supreme Court justices be attorneys, yet no President has ever nominated a non-lawyer.

Miers nomination was craftily excellent and will be the greatest political fun.

More On Senate "Collegiality": Concessions to Democrat Lawyers

2005-09-21T13:37:00.000-07:00

The chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Senator Arlen Spector, must be feeling collegial, again. He is urging Republicans to delay Sandra Day O'Connor's replacement on the Supreme Court. Moreover, Sen. Spector advises he talked to retiring associate justice about staying on the high court, through June. Spector, a member of the true senate majority - the lawyers - adds his name to the group of senators who play games with loyalty to the Republican party. As an independent voter, I find that political collegiality allows colonizers of the Senate (lawyers) to usurp the majority agenda from Republicans. Meaningful reforms do not get done, therefore.

definition: collegial - characterized by having authority (the chairman's) vested equally among colleagues (lawyers). (obvious interpretaions by Vigilis)

Now Hear This: From Former Secretary of the Navy John Lehman

2005-09-20T11:39:00.000-07:00

Former Secretary of the Navy John Lehman served as a member of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, the "independent, bipartisan commission" that was "chartered to prepare a full and complete account of the circumstances surrounding the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.

This lends impressive weight to what Vigilis has been saying about the damaging effects of too many lawyers now in the military's chain of command...
Hat tip to WillyShake at Unconsidered Trifles for his in-person reporting of a recent address by John Lehman:
"Lehman leaves partisan politics at the door (for example, 'I would love to bash Hillary, but the matter goes beyond that...') and goes after what he perceives as the real problem that threatens our national security: Bloated, hyper-litigious, bureaucracy that is drunk on political correctness..."

and more....

"To illustrate this point, he noted that he recently met the CENTCOM lawyer who prevented the firing of a Hellfire missile at Mullah Omar when we had the chance to take him out. The lawyer was still quite adamant, said Lehman with disgust, that the attack would have violated Executive Order 11905, signed in 1976 by President Ford making it illegal for the US government to engage in assassinations of foreign heads of state. "

Louisiana Corruption: Senior officials in Louisiana's emergency planning agency Indicted Before Katrina Hit

2005-09-17T16:57:00.000-07:00

From the Los Angeles Times (September 17, 2005, National News) By Ken Silverstein and Josh Meyer, Times Staff Writers:
Louisiana Officials Indicted Before Katrina Hit

WASHINGTON — Senior officials in Louisiana's emergency planning agency already were awaiting trial over allegations stemming from a federal investigation into waste, mismanagement and missing funds when Hurricane Katrina struck.

U.S. officials are still trying to track $60 million in unaccounted for FEMA funds funneled to the state from the Federal Emergency Management Agency dating back to 1998.

The problems are acute, because they involve the Louisiana Office of Homeland Security and Emergency Preparedness, the agency that will administer billions in federal aid to victims of Katrina. Federal Homeland Security officials announced they would send 30 investigators and auditors to the Gulf Coast to ensure relief funds were properly spent.

FEMA has demanded back $30.4 million paid into that program and others, including a program to buy out flood-prone homeowners. As much as $30 million in additional unaccounted for spending also is under review in audits that have not yet been released, according to a FEMA official.

About $2.8 million of the refund sought by FEMA went to 'consultant' fees. Most of that money went to Aegis Innovative Systems, a Baton Rouge firm hired by many parishes to administer the flood buyout program. Aegis owners include Mark Howard, a former official at the Louisiana agency. State Sen. Reggie Dupre said it appeared that parishes employing Aegis were especially successful in winning money from the state emergency preparedness agency.
"It smells like a horrible brother-in-law deal to me, " he said in a phone interview. An Aegis attorney did not respond to a request for comment.

UPDATE here.

Legal Theft: When Lawyers Win, Retirees, Workers, and Taxpayers Lose

2005-09-12T22:57:00.000-07:00

The legal establishment in this country thrives on chaos. Senators extort in the halls of Congress, propagandize with the media's help, and hold a large economic bludgeon over the head of any business it targets.

If you ran CNN or the NYT, you would know from day one that while the government (voice of the electorate) cannot interfere with freddoms of the press, the legal establishment through lawsuits (libel, defamation), injunctions and class action suits could ruin your business.

Who, then, would you be friendlier toward? Is it any wonder then, that the news media are slanted toward the party that is run by lawyers, supported largely by trial lawyers and favors candidates who are lawyers? Is there any wonder that lawyers in the opposing party do not seem as loyal as they ought to be when push comes to shove?

Is the legal establishment in the U.S. already too powerful to be checked? Unfortunately, the power structure can only be altered every 2 years (House = 34% lawyers) or 6 years (Senate = 53%). When the Executive branch is headed by a lawyer (e.g. Nixon, Clinton) change takes 4 years, of course.

For all practical purposes, the federal Judiciary is populated by lawyers in perpetuity.

Introducing: Lone Ranger, Riding America for Education of Blacks, Hispanics and White Trash - - - See Why

2005-09-08T23:28:00.000-07:00

Expanded from original posting by Vigilis at the Molten Eagle blog.

Politicians have a habit of changing my mind about supporting any single party. I hold fast to the idea that three, strong, political parties competing with each other might provide more openess in government and dilute collusive impacts of the LAW profession's colonization of the U.S. Senate (53%), the House (34%) and the Judiciary (100%).

Unfortunately, we are not there yet, and rumors of a John McCain split already carries an alliance of well-placed House and Senate lawyers. Same ol', same ol'.

Always open-minded and professionally skeptical, I find interesting opinions and well-crafted essays of all stripes. I demand more than a modicum of factual support and loathe emotional propaganda, however. Occasionally, I will be fooled, but not very often. Below, I have linked to one of the better pieces.

I will not describe its leanings, because it is best that you judge it for yourself. Go here for The History of Republican Evil by Lone Ranger. Whether you are a Democrat, Republican, or independent, you should be interested to read what Lone Ranger tells us. -Vigilis

Dictator Saddam to Get the Mother of All Trials - Portions to be Televised

2005-09-02T14:45:00.000-07:00

Cairo University's School of Law alumnus: Saddam Hussein

Reuters reports that Saddam's trial is scheduled to start Wednesday, October 19th, according to an Iraqi government source today. That is barely a few days after Iraq's referendum on its new constitution, on or around October 15th.

The close timing suggests an inglorious, final end for the notorious dictator.

A source, not connected with the Special Tribunal trying the deposed president forecasts a quick trial and execution. "After what he did, how can we not execute him?"

Yesterday, Iraq hanged three criminals in its first judicial executions since Saddam's overthrow in 2003. The Shi'ite-led government clearly wish a relatively quick (in weeks, not months) death sentence for the man held responsible for thousands of homicides.

Ramsey Clark Mystery Solved: Guilt Feelings?

2005-08-30T02:46:00.000-07:00

Former United States Attorney General Ramsey Clark seems an enigma to Americans of all stripes. In April 2005, MSNBC interviewed Clark concerning Saddam's upcoming trial. (Saddam's family announced this month in Jordan that they had dismissed the entire 1,500-member Arab and Western defense team, except for Iraqi attorney Khalil al-Dulaimi).

Well, Ramsey Clark who would have defended Saddam, has defended many high profile clients in his controversial career since leaving LBJ's Whitehouse in 1969 after two years. His client list has included former Yugoslav strongman Slobodan Milosevic, Native American activist Leonard Peltier on death row, Bosnian Serb leader Radovan Karadzic, Omar Abdel-Rahman (the blind Egyptian sheikh accused of masterminding a plot to collapse the World Trade Center), Elizaphan Ntakirutimana (former church head in Rwanda) sentenced to prison for aiding and abetting genocide, and Nazi concentration camp commander Karl Linnas.

Why a man of Clark's stature would stoop so low has been explained in the usual manner for lawyers; that is, everyone, regardless of guilt deserves the best possible defense. Is there more to Clark's motivation than noble cause? Only he knows for sure, but you may want to consider this and come to your own conclusion:

Tom Campbell Clark (1899-1977), the U.S. Supreme Court Justice, was forced to resign in 1967 by President Lyndon Johnson's appointment of his son, Ramsey, to the post of U.S. Attorney General. The obvious conflict of interest is thought by some to have been intended by President Johnson as a surefire method of dumping the elder Clark. Thurgood Marshall was appointed in his stead.

To many lawyers being a Supreme Court Justice represents the very pinnacle of their legal profession. Some would argue that the prestige is even better than a President's due to the lifetime term involved.

Realizing his political career had been prematurely eclipsed by LBJ's early retirement two years after agreeing to end his own father's Supreme Court career, poor Ramsey Clark may have felt obliged to prove his selfish pursuit of government office had not been in vain. He needed to demonstrate the validity of his career with personal achievements equal or greater even than Supreme Court Justice. But how?

Clark had to rise on a larger playing field than private practice in the U.S. That meant international law. His clients from then on had to be of internationally high profile. While client wealth would often be essential, savory character could be unimportant.

So began the not so mysterious, private career of this very guilt-ridden, decidedly liberal, eminently qualified lawyer to his current, worldly stature. Reasonable? You must decide.

Note: When Saddam fled to Egypt (in 1959, after being shot in an attempted assassination and sentenced to death in absentia), he attended Cairo University's School of Law.

Radical Islamic Utopia: Part Two

2005-08-23T23:02:00.000-07:00

Militias of Islamic Courts reported by the Las Vegas SUN in August 23, 2005 chaos:

MOGADISHU, Somalia (AP) - Militias of Islamic courts (sic) on Tuesday began pulling down stalls suspected of selling wine in Somalia's capital. Witnesses said militiamen also confiscated equipment from two video halls during the effort to enforce sharia - or Islamic law. Six people were arrested.

Sheikh Ahmed Mo'alin Yusuf, a leader of the Islamic courts, said "We want to fight against everything that can spread obnoxious misconduct within this Muslim community and the use of narcotics and other toxic drugs," he said.

A transitional government was formed last year, but the administration has failed to relocate to Mogadishu because the city is considered unsafe. The government is also opposed by Islamic extremists and some of the dozens of warlords who control some of the country's 53,000 militias.

U.S. citizens who might vote for an Islamic candidate must understand the proscriptions of freedom anathema to our constitution that sharia would certainly bring, if allowed to propsper. Militias of courts should have a frightening ring to freedom loving Americans.

Radical Islamic Utopia: Somalia After 14 Years

2005-08-14T12:50:00.000-07:00

One must consider if radical extremist muslims are wannabe lawyers. How's that you say?Lawyers, like parasites, are non-producers. Their only real service, for which they have granted themselves monoply, is a semblance of order created through just a bit less chaos.

Perpetual chaos is in their profession's best interest, so they help foster, expand and complicate everything that generates it. Ever heard of a simple contract, unregulated area, keeping recidivst criminals in prison? Didn't think so. As long as there is crime-breeding chaos, and legal complexity, lawyers have excellent job security. As voters, we must watch carefully what lawyers support, particularly those in the U.S. Congress and Judiciary.

What about Somalia? The AP just reported: Rival militias in Somalia battled yesterday for control over a village with pastures and wells. Twelve combatants died, and hundreds of residents were forced to flee.

Somalia has had no functioning central government since clan-based warlords overthrew dictator Mohamed Siad Barre in 1991. Warlords battle each other, plunging the country of 7 million into chaos. The transitional government is also split. The president and prime minister have moved 60 miles northwest of Mogadishu, saying the capital is no longer safe.

The parliamentary speaker, dozens of lawmakers and warlords in Mogadishu, however, have argued the decision was unconstitutional. Like lawyers, Warlords, it seems are experts on constitutionality as well as chaos.

Chappaqua Candidate Collides with Muslims in Heartland

2005-08-09T00:46:00.000-07:00

In 1992, Hillary Clinton (LAWYER) was quoted as saying, "I've done the best I can to lead my life. I suppose I could have stayed home and baked cookies and had teas." Her suggestion of greater value for womanhood outside the home offended those who believe in traditional two-parent marriages where one spouse (usually the "stay at home mom") actually attends to raising children to religious moral values, teaches them self-discipline, provides loving day care, may home school, and energetically runs a general household.

Wendy McElroy published an article (Foxnews.com, March 18, 2003) entitled, "Iraq War May Kill Feminism as We Know It." Making the argument "Western feminists . . . are hostile to religion, and especially to Christianity," McElroy suggests "places Western feminism on a collision course with its Muslim counterpart . . . Islamic feminism tends to be pro-family and not inherently anti-male." Modern Islam permits polygamy, although it is not encouraged universally.

Ms. Clinton must now consider a voter block which traditionally rejects the brand of feminism she has come to symbolize. Her dilemma, though it may seem minor, is how to reconcile political correctness and political expediency -without alienating the Muslim females' vote. Arab Americans of both genders cast some 1.7 million votes, more than enough to impact a presidential election. What gives further value to their votes, however, is their high turnout rate.

Militant feminists, please standby to tone down your customary, in-the-face hostility and to reign your ranting rhetoric. Un-metro sexualized males, a sub-set of the minority gender, may soon enjoy your reluctant return to civility.

Of two incisive bloggers, Rob has been rather defensive of Hillary lately, while Chapomatic saw fit to make a Quote O' The Day out of Progressive Democrat's having embarrassing problems brewing regarding Muslim women.

Federal Monies for Lawyers: Exploiting Bad Public Education

2005-08-08T12:02:00.000-07:00

An ABA poll, being released today, shows that just over half of adults can correctly identify the three branches of government - legislative, executive and judicial - and explain the concept of separation of powers. How terrible that public education has not done a better job of teaching citizenship and constitutional powers!

Michael Greco, a Boston lawyer who will take over as ABA president this week, asked retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor (LAWYER) and former Sen. Bill Bradley, (LAWYER) D-NJ, to help educate people on civics fundamentals. They will be honorary co-chairs of a civic education commission. How uncharacteristically generous of LAWYERS to undertake remedial civics lessons nationwide and entirely at their own expense!

Reality Checks:
How many LAWYERS will the civic education commission employ? Hint: watch for a new name like Civic Education Corporation.
How politically unbiased will civics lessons be? (See About...Blue State, Michael Greco)
Remember, LAWYERS already comprise 100% of the Judiciary and 53% of the SENATE.
When will this education project become permanent and receive federal grant monies?

About the ABA. Is it biased? According to this professer and this lawyer who says "Which, come to think of it, is why I resigned from it several years ago", yes. What about the ABA's new President, Blue State Michael Greco (LAWYER) - Is he biased? Greco, who has resided in Massachusetts for 31 years, co-founded and co-chaired a grassroots organization that helped preserve the Legal Services Corporation (LSC) in the 1980s.

The LSC has resisted reforms because it was designed by LAWYERS to avoid external controls. In affect, it takes public funds (your tax dollars) and transforms them into private funds (LAWYER INCOME), $335,282,000.00 in FY 2005. The Heritage Foundation has alleged that "Unfortunately, taxpayer-funded legal groups, under LSC, engage in political, lobbyist, and cause-advocacy activities, often at the expense of providing real legal services needed by poor people."

More:
In the United States, scholars have analyzed the Legal Services Corporation in terms of the choice between pursuing appellate cases, which might change rules, such as trying to get the housing rules changed through litigation, and pursuing cases that will solve immediate problems of poor clients, such as stopping an eviction. Criticism of the choice to pursue appellate cases colored the opposition to the Legal Services Corporation and lead to its losses in the Reagan administration. (Budget had been $400,000,000.00) What can this mean? Check out these outrages, here.

Whine Tasters' Quote of the Month

2005-08-04T13:34:00.000-07:00

Our enormous democratic (ed. Democrat) problem is we cannot lose again. If we do, we will awake in ten years and our country will not longer be worth saving. - nyceve in comment: "Hillary won't run away from history" Mon Aug 1st, 2005 at 05:33:07 PDT
f rom the Daily Kos Mon Aug 1st, 2005 at 02:24:23 PDT

Imagine! Perhaps some price quotations are in order. This will be very helpful:
Online Search for international movers.

Now, word comes that Americans DID NOT flee to Canada after Bush's November win. The number of Americans who applied to live permanently in Canada actually fell in the six months after the election. A spokeswoman for Canada's federal immigration ministry declined to speculate on the reasons for the drop.

STRUGGLE vs. WAR: Secrets Between the Lines

2005-07-28T19:47:00.000-07:00

No one without clearance for Bush's Daily Intelligence Briefing seems to understand to a credible degree a sudden shift from WAR on global terrorism to the trial balloon STRUGGLE Against Violent Extremism. Whatever is driving the change is elemental and deadly serious. The president's detractors know he is much too savvy to blunder without purpose, but for consistency’s sake say it is a sign of his stupidity, anyway. Bush's supporters, who know how deliberate and calculating his strokes have been, seem universally puzzled and fear the president has succumbed to politically motivated back stepping. Neither explanation is at all logical.

Hint#1- The problem with the term GWOT is that it automatically invokes the Bush doctrine of unilateral preemptive strike. Nice if you have to use it, but bad when it looks like you should and you really should not.

Hint#2- According to Michael Ledeen in yesterday's Coalition of Evil "The centrality of Iran in the terror network is the dirty secret that most everyone knows, but will not pronounce."Our military people in both Iraq and Afghanistan have copious evidence of the Iranian role in the terror war against us and our allies. Every now and then Rumsfeld makes a passing reference to it. But we have known about Iranian assassination teams in Afghanistan ever since the fall of the Taliban, and we know that Iranians continue to fund, arm, and guide the forces of such terrorists as Gulbadin Hekmatyar. We know that Zarqawi operated out of Tehran for several years..

Hint #3- (quoting Ledeen, again): we are fighting a sucker’s war in Iraq, because the terrorists get a great deal of their support from the Syrians, Saudis, and Iranians...

Molten Eagle's Synthesis: Among the Syrians, Saudis, and Iranians there is probably none less culpable of supporting Islamo terrorists than the others. Unless WMDs are unleashed against a coalition country or its forces, another preemptive strike to overturn a regime (rather than take out some resources) is not in the cards. The public GWOT strategy had to be publicly changed. The non-public GSAVE Struggle strategy has not changed at all, except that by now much damning data against the Axis of Syraudiiran has been collated. In each of those countries, people with clean hands will manage to purge those with soiled hands of their own volition. How is this possible? Using one of the oldest techniques devised by civilized man -diplomacy. How will you know when this has started? Look more closely, it already has.

Ice Age Planning (Humor)

2005-07-15T04:01:00.000-07:00

Ice Age Planning Step #1
Surround yourself with PETA members now; they are kind to animals, preferring to consume grains and veggies. When the sudden food shortage arises, PETA members not only taste the best, they obviously make the healthiest choice. They do not harbor growth hormones and drugs found in regular, beef-fed humans and are most certainly free of Mad Cow disease. Cardiologists also claim grain-fed PETA activists have healthier nutritional profiles, including heart-healthful Omega 3 fatty acids. Fortunately, PETA members are organized and very easy to find just about everywhere. You have just solved your hunting and gathering problem!

Ice Age Planning Step #2
Identify any ACLU lawyers in your nearest city now. They are great proponents of public service and well-versed in nuanced distinctions. These "specialists" will be indispensable in one of two ways. Fungi (mushrooms) will become a vital part of your ice-age nutrition pyramid when crop shortages develop. Identification of edible versus toxic look-a-likes should be left to the expertise of ACLU lawyers practiced as they are in nuanced distinctions. Of course, they will need to improve upon these skills by personally sampling fungi before others consume it. Those who possess inadequate nuance skills can be expected to "drop out" of your foraging parties. Those who claim they are not so interested in public service, afterall, or who claim mushroom allergies may be traded to distant tribes for more useful furs or pelts. CAUTION: Never attempt acculturation of ACLU types unwilling to eat mushrooms; their litigious attitude will generate unnecessary strife, divisions and chaos into your caravan for many generations. ACLU lawyers are generally urban dwellers who seek anonymity. Identify them with the help of your state's bar association or prison population. You have just solved your foraging problem!

For Disclaimer, please see Molten Eagle

Rx for Viral Terror Attack: Lawyers or Antibodies (Military)?

2005-07-07T09:53:00.000-07:00

Some LAWYER-Senators want Islamist terrorists treated as criminals (creating more jobs for lawyers). Muslims shed greater light on reality. Here are 3 pithy comments by muslims. LAWYER-Senators, please take note! (Emphasis added):

1- Claimed collateral damage is not always so: "Once the Americans bombed a bus crossing to Syria. We made a big fuss and said it was full of merchants," Abu Ibrahim said. "But actually, they were fighters." source: see # (7)

2- Pacific Rim Bureau (CNSNews.com) - The Pentagon has approved the release of a group of Uighur Muslims who are among the terror suspects detained at Guantanamo Bay, but the U.S. is trying to find a third country willing to take them, because of fears they will face persecution or death if they return to China.

3- The Radical Islamic Threat – An American Primer (Dec. 2004) - by Haneef Al-Humacao

Current U.S. Attitude: Complacent Civilians / Vigilant Military
In August 2004, neither the threat of radical Muslim terrorists nor a tenet of the entire Muslim faith requiring violence is acknowledged by politically correct U.S. citizenry or mainstream clergy. A prominent political party characterizes the Islamic jihadist threat as an overblown quest for power by isolated thugs from Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan. Muslim clerics do not condemn the thugs, however.

The risk of instant harm at the hands terrorists pales in comparison to highway mortality. This analogy is very wrongheaded, however. Terrorist violence is more of a plague –it can potentially wipe out society. Although plague contagion appears to lie dormant, vectors suddenly spread it to many victims. Likewise, Al Qaeda terror cells colonize and patiently plot, aided by sympathetic hosts.

Global Reach: Cells, Recruiting and Financial Support
According to Britannica Yearbook,1997, nearly one in five people claims the faith of Islam. There are 69 countries throughout the world whose Muslim populations comprise at least 10% of their total. There is at least one radical, Muslim leader in each of these countries capable of recruiting thousands of followers and diverting “charity” funds.

China’s Muslims, barely 3% of its total population, number almost 29 million, or twice the number of Southern Baptists in the U.S. The combined Muslim populations of just three small countries: Pakistan, Nigeria and Ethiopia exceeds the entire U.S. population. (CIA fact book statistics).

Less than 15% of Muslims are Arab. Most are Asian. Morrocan terrorists may have carried out Spain’s recent train bombings, but an almost “shoe bomber” was distinctly British. Al Qaeda supported cells have also been reported in the Philippines, Indonesia, France, Canada, Mexico, Germany, Belgium, Italy, South America, the Chechen Republic, New York, Detroit, Florida, and Arizona. Muslim political influence has been growing steadily in France and there is currently one U.S. congressional candidate receiving Muslim support.

Historical Precedent: The “Scourge of God”
Islamic radical terrorism is nothing new. Global sovereignty of Islam has been their stated aim. Before bin Laden was Tamourlane (Timur the Lenk, 1336-1405). Calling himself “the Scourge of God,” Tamourlane unleashed his militant bands to vanquish Afghanistan, exterminate 80,000 souls in Delhi, and behead thousands of Christians who were in his way.

Terrorist Strategy: Incite Muslim Fervor to Violence, Exploit Our Weaknesses
Imbedded feminism, gay rights, and religious pluralism are not symbols of societal strengths to Wahhabi Muslims, but are symbols of Satanic power and infidel willingness to tolerate corruption. Only the U.S. lead coalition stands in the way of Tamourlane’s latest surrogates, who must pounce again and again to disrupt our economy. Beheading women and slaying children on U.S. soil, however, may ultimately prove less costly and more ghastly than monumental maneuvers to date. Given the chance, terrorists will gravitate to simpler tactics with greater frequency. Muslim candidates will seek political office to hasten destruction of our government and install war lords to invoke martial rule.

U.S. Counter: Deny Office, Promote Unity, Expect Clerical Condemnation
The would-be “war lord” of your region has already consorted with known criminals, lied to juries, aspired to, and more than likely been elected to political office. He/she has shown is spineless enough to convert to the Muslim faith in the two minutes required. We must shun such candidates; deny them office; promote national unity against terrorism; and expect their true leaders (i.e. Muslim clerics) to condemn acts of terror quickly, loudly and clearly.

Signed Declaration of Independence Before He Signed Allegiance to King George III

2005-07-05T01:47:00.000-07:00

A high-profile flip-flop, reminiscent of LAWYER-Senator Kerry's admission during his presidential campaign, involved an illustrious LAWYER who was also a signer of our Declaration of Independence.

Richard Stockton (1730-1781): In 1776 Stockton was elected to the Continental Congress, where he took a very active role. Shortly after he signed the Declaration of Independence, he was taken prisoner by the British and dragged in bitterly cold weather to Perth Amboy. He was later taken to New York and put in the notorious Provost Jail, where he suffered brutal treatment.

It was at this point that he became a turncoat. He renounced the revolution and signed a different declaration, a "Declaration of Allegiance" to the King, George III, and gave "his word of honor that he would not meddle in the least of American affairs." A formal remonstrance from Congress led to his release January 3, 1777.

Upon Stockton's return to Princeton, it became known that during his imprisonment the British had persuaded him to sign the second Declaration, which required an oath of allegiance to the King -- an act Stockton revoked later that year by signing oaths of adjuration and allegiance prescribed by the New Jersey legislature. "Thus, he has the dubious honor of being the only signer of the Declaration of Independence to betray the cause." [source. Wikipedia.org]

"Well-connected local people probably don't get prosecuted as much,'' said professor John Corkery of the James Madison Law School in Chicago. Well, apparently it's more beneficial than that for LAWYERS. In 1968, the New Jersey legislature approved The Richard Stockton College of New Jersey in Southern New Jersey. Not surprising, considering how many versions of American history manage to omit Stockton's unique, little "flip-flops".

What Does Ted Kennedy Really Want and Mean?

2005-07-02T15:28:00.000-07:00

Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-MA) Friday threatened to oppose Bush's choice of retiring Justice O'Connor's replacement "if the president abuses his power and nominates someone who threatens to roll back the rights and freedoms of the American people." Story by Jeff Johnson of CNSNEWS.com is here.

Let's review. Sen. Kennedy (LAWYER) LLB, University of Virgina Law School, 1959. He had been suspended from Harvard in May 1951 after he arranged for another student to take a final examination in a Spanish class in his place. Now, it is no surprise that LAWYER-SENATORS bear scrutiny. This guy's ultra-liberal record means he is the epitome of propaganda. What does he mean by "roll back the freedoms" of American people? Not what you may think. He is not afraid Civil Rights or abortion on demand will be overturned, because there is no possibility that would happen. What about gay rights? No, EEOC rights are here to stay and marriage rights never made it. So what, then, does this LAWYER really mean? He and most LAWYERS mean what they cannot admit publicly, but what we read about them doing everyday.

According to 1998 U.S. Census data, the median annual income for lawyers and judges was slightly over $100,000. In order to assure job security and high income for Defense Attorneys, Prosecuting Attorneys and Judges (compare their $50 average, hourly compensation rate to that of a citizen serving on "Jury Duty" in your state), LAWYERS want to assure that convicted criminals' rights are not rolled back. Did you notice that Defense Attorney's, Prosecutors and Judges are all LAWYERS and three of them, at a minimum, are required for every trial? Are there calls for new courthouses and judges in every county to keep up with the crime? Odd, where are the equal calls for more prison building? Hmmm.

About 68% of the time that a guilty defendant gets released, receives a plea-bargained sentence, too light a sentence because there is not enough jail space, or even parole, guess what we have? We have recidivism -more crime by a repeat offender. But when that happens guess what LAWYERS have? More trials (more business and job security).

Guess who the largest contributor to the Democrat party represents? If you guessed trial LAWYERS, you would be correct. Is this problem only with Democrat LAWYER-SENATORS?
Certainly not. Don't be fooled. Consider very long and hard the need to elect or return any LAWYER to a public office.

Remember, the talk about rolling back the rights of Americans refers to America's criminals.

Games Lawyer-Senators Play (party disloyalty)

2005-06-20T18:19:00.000-07:00

WASHINGTON (AP) - reported By LIZ SIDOTI "I think it's time for the Senate to give him an up-or-down vote. Now," the president said. Bush has said Bolton, with a history of blunt talk and skepticism about the U.N.'s power, would lead an effort to overhaul the world body's bureaucracy and make it more accountable. Even before the vote, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (JD -George Washington School of Law, 1064), D-Nev., predicted the Senate would block the nomination again _ leaving Bush in a ticklish situation.

The vote was 54-38, six shy of the total needed to force a final vote on Bolton, and represented an erosion in support from last month's failed Republican effort. Sen. George Voinovich (JD -Ohio State University, 1961), R-Ohio, who voted in May to advance the nomination, switched positions. Like the vote in May, Sens. Mark Pryor of Arkansas (J.D. -University of Arkansas, 1988), Ben Nelson of Nebraska (JD -University of Nebraska, 1970) and Mary Landrieu (BA -Louisiana State University, 1977) of Louisiana were the only Democrats to support the move to have an immediate final vote.

The Good Are Soon Corrupted- Lawyers 1 Step Removed

2005-06-18T23:33:00.000-07:00

Senator Durbin, a typical Senate LAWYER (JD, Georgetown University, 1969) is part of the reason the public feels cheated when good people are elected to office and have their outlooks changed by the Washington, D.C. political machinery. Lawyers of both parties comprise 53% of the Senate nowadays and 100% of the Judicial branch. The separation of powers, a system of checks and balances conceived by our founders, has been subverted by class rule -the Lawyer Class.

We would certainly not consider a Senate of over 50% Realtors, Auto Salespersons or College Professors to faithfully represent America. Yet, look what has happened. People feel: 1) lawyers are smart; 2) lawyers are good at writing and reading law; and, 3) lawyers are models of decorum making them "naturals" for the job of congressman or senator. All of the above may be partially true. But, in reality: 4) lawyers are also trained to defend the guilty with any plausible lie; 5) propagandize juries; and, 6) extort money through mere threats (of litigation and personal ruin).

Newcomers go to Washington to serve their constituencies as promised, but with their rules of decorum are given a new pecking order placing federal judges atop a power structure dominated entirely by lawyers. Newbies feel powerless, humbled and very vulnerable, especially when threatened with political threats and retribution. Conversion to the Washington way of thinking takes place relatively quickly. Lawyers, it seems, are only one step removed from con artists and mobsters. The difference lies in their license to practice law.

What's worse yet, is that long-serving Senators like Durbin are the role models for newcomers. Anyone besides me starting to see a problem with the status quo?

Update June 2005: Lawyer Kings Promote Their Job Security

2005-06-01T23:03:00.000-07:00

In my May 23rd "EARLY WARNING: Colonization of the Senate" I explained the growing peril in diminished checks and balances between the three, separate branches of federal government. Lawyer-politicians dominate the legislative branches currently; their "kings," the federal judges, totally populate the judiciary at all times, and sometimes LAWYERS (e.g. Bill Clinton, Gerald Ford, Richard Nixon) have even headed the executive branch.

As one of the poor consequences, the public gets judicial leniency promoting recidivism (crime by repeat offenders). Recidivism, of course, boosts lawyer employment as new crimes and trials will require at minimum three lawyers - a judge, a defense attorney and a prosecutor. Upon appeal, the lawyer employment factor is repeated.

Only a week or so later comes this AP story by David Kravets: U.S. Court: Thousands Can Challenge Terms. SAN FRANCISCO (AP) - Thousands of inmates doing federal time in the West won a chance to challenge their sentences under an appeals court ruling Wednesday. In its 7-4 ruling Wednesday, the 9th Circuit held for allowing all federal inmates whose convictions are on appeal to challenge their sentences. The 9th Circuit Court - the nations largest appeals court, covers nine Western states. Dissenting judges say the decision will prompt a flood of appeals estimated in "perhaps the thousands." (x 3 LAWYERS each)

GOOD NEWS! High Court Declines to Rule on Sentencing
WASHINGTON (AP) Jun 20, 10:45 AM (ET) - The Supreme Court decline today to consider whether hundreds of criminals sentenced before a landmark ruling on federal sentencing guidelines should receive reduced prison time. With no comment, justices let stand a lower court ruling against a Florida convict who challenged his nine-year, mandatory guideline, drug sentence that the Supreme Court subsequently threw out as unconstitutional in January. Rodriguez v. U.S., 04-1148

Lawyer Malpractice

2005-05-26T20:46:00.000-07:00

Do you know personally anyone who has successfully sued a lawyer? Can you even find a lawyer willing to sue another one? You may be surprised how difficult that can be. Try (courtesy of ABA) your state bar association's referral service. See LAW.COM: there are many examples including this one of legal malpractice, but it is difficult for plaintiffs to prevail according to NJ malpractice lawyer Glenn Bergenfield, who actually published a few legal malpractice FAQs.

Now, think of medical malpractice, and ask the same question: Do you know personally anyone who has successfully sued an MD? Remember, undisclosed out-of-court settlements count as successes for LAWYERS and plaintiffs only. Can you even find a lawyer willing to sue an MD?
Unless you are a lawyer or a politician your answers are more likely to be "YES" here than in the former paragraph.

When would you say "Acts of God" are more likely to come into play, with the work of MDs or the work of lawyers? Regardless of your opinion on the death penalty, how often have we heard politicians, usually of the trial-lawyer governed party, the Dems., say that too many men on death row (any number greater than 1) are probably innocent? I stipulate that some have later been found innocent. Well, how did the jury and judge conclude their guilt? If MDs can be sued for malpractice when the outcome goes poorly for the patient, why do lawyers seem to be exempt when the outcome goes poorly for their clients?

Even Clinton's and Nixon's lawyers could not prevent their client's disbarment. Why did they not sue their lawyers, then? Are relationships with lawyers warmer and friendlier than patient relationships with MDs can professionaly get? I rather doubt that, although Nixon (NY) and Clinton (AK) probably relied on trusty friends to defend them. As long as lawyers continue to disproportionately dominate all three branches of our government meaningful regulation of lawyers, which increasingly is needed, will be unlikely.

MDs are regulated by malpractice threats and professional oversight. Lawyers now are subject to relatively nil malpractice threats and professional oversight that more and more merely excuses or condones their bad behavior. See KINGPINS Part II: Pablo Escobar or Members of the Bar, for examples. What can we do? Keep trial lawyers from elected offices other than judgeships, which the legal profession already and permanently owns (one whole branch of government). Our founders never intended 36% of the House and 53% of the Senate to be held by law school graduates.

I am independent: political corruption is not limited to one party, but one profession looks increasingly like it is perfecting a lock on our government from inside all three.

What Should We Have Expected from a Lawyer?

2005-05-26T20:42:00.000-07:00

People who know me laugh about my general disdain for lawyers. If there is a choice, I will not vote for a lawyer (especially those who "hide" their law degrees and pretend another profession).

There are many very good lawyers, even a few of my blood relatives. Generally, we have far too many in the U.S. (more than 7 million in our workforce) and that is both parasitic to our economy and paralyzing to our culture. Put lawyers in the command and control loop, however, and we get a "woos" effect on our military. The enemy loves our lawyers and political correctness!

Read about the Navy’s unfortunate role (to wit) in the early Afghan war:As reported by The Los Angeles Times - When Air Force targeters in Afghanistan spotted a Taliban convoy near Kandahar they asked permission to strike. A Pentagon lawyer advised against it, fearing civilians might be killed. The convoy moved forward, allowing the Taliban to reinforce troops faced off against the U.S.-backed Northern Alliance.A week earlier, it was a lawyer, operating at the right hand of commanding Gen. Tommy R. Franks, who at first advised against firing a missile at a line of jeeps that intelligence officials believed was carrying Taliban leader Mullah Mohammed Omar. The lawyer feared the attack might violate a policy against assassinating a head of state.

Or, as reported by the Washington Post, Sunday, November 18, 2001 - As many as 10 times over the last six weeks, the Air Force believed it had top Taliban and al Qaeda members in its cross hairs in Afghanistan but was unable to receive clearance to fire in time to hit them, according to senior Air Force officials. And the ArabNews - The view of Air Force officials is that Franks frequently was swayed by the excessive doubts of his subordinate intelligence officers and his legal adviser. The Central Command’s top lawyer, or JAG—repeatedly refused to permit strikes even when the targets were unambiguously military in nature, an Air Force officer said. At one point in October, a Taliban military convoy was moving north to reinforce positions facing the front lines of the Northern Alliance, the Afghan rebel army. The JAG, Navy Capt. Shelly Young, declined to approve it on the grounds that ”it might be a trick,” the officer said. What was the Navy trying to prove? That lawyers are genderless? Capt. Young did what should have been expected by the Navy. What would Ann Coulter, also a lawyer, have done? I think we know...a better job.

Harvard Promotes Using Volunteer Attorneys as Prosecutors

2005-05-26T20:39:00.000-07:00

This WISTV article is a good example of how fast we are regressing in blind acquiesence of our court system to the monopoly "ofthebar." In a well-intentioned move Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government and The Council For Excellence In Government have recognized a program in South Carolina allowing volunteer attorneys to prosecute criminal domestic violence cases in local court jurisdictions lacking government prosecutors.

Currently, application is limited to cases that would have been prosecuted by the investigating police officer instead of a trained lawyer. Who knows what steps will be taken next to have foxes guarding the henhouse. Trusting trial attorneys to act in pure prosecutorial fashion (no influence peddling or kickbacks) is potentially disasterous for the state. More importantly, it desensitizes the public to the independence and conflict of interest required for the appearance of fairness.

Here Harvard has applauded SC's program as "innovative" and is considering awarding SC a grant. Read about South Carolina lawyers (#1) in my March 10, 2005 post under Kingpins Part II: Pablo Escobar or Members Ofthebar. Wow, appears to be a total breakdown of due process!

Lawyers as Parasites (Infestations Ofthebar and More)

2005-05-26T20:35:00.000-07:00

More and more attorneys are joining their parasitic peers as their numbers increase (over 7 million in the U.S. alone according to YourCongress.com or about 6% of our 125 Million workforce are law grads) and competition for jobs in politics, courts, government, industry (executives at all of the fortune 100 and every major insurance company), grant-recipients (not-for-profits), lobbyists, and litigators increases. Like the criminals they protect, such lawyers will do almost anything to reap dollars other than an honest day's work. These people did not attend law school to serve mankind (although oddly, some state Trial Lawyer's Association ads state they are there "To help you"). They want to live large withoutlifting a finger to produce like honest folk.

Kevin O'Hanlon did an AP report today "Lawsuits over disabled-access law unfounded, business owners say": http://www.heraldtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050318/BUSINESS/503180578/1060 Long story short, one judge is suggesting ..."a large number of ADA lawsuits are frivilous actions by a small number of disabled people and their lawyers." One litigant had filed 200 ADA lawsuits in just a few years, most of them using the same attorney. The suing paraplegic left the impression that he is a "professional pawn in a scheme to bilk attorney's fees" from those being sued. Another wheelchair-bound plaintiff brought 400 lawsuits since 1998, demanding up to $4,000 a day until the business is in "compliance." He then agrees to out of court cash settlements which include attorneys fees and more. When organized crime used such tactics, it was called "extortion," was illegal and prosecuted. Isn't it wonderful that the new capos of organized crime are attorneys, their shakedown schemes although extortive are not illegal and never prosecuted. You may want to read the earlier blog "Kingpins Part II - Pablo Escobar or Members Ofthe bar for examples of errant lawyer sentencing. What happened to the death penalty for drug kingpins? Have you noticed the increasing number of businesses conducted by convicts not smart enough to stay out of jail? Such businesses are very clever schemes to defraud elderly people (usually of their life savings). To my knowledge, lawyers have yet to be connected with one of their clever prison schemes. When it does (if it has) it will be covered up by a compliant media and condoning judges. Any sentence would be minimal (a "white collar" offense for lawyers) with probation most likely.

Ever noticed lawyers suing phyicians for malpractice if things do not go right? Do you think lawyers are ever sued for malpractice when things do not go just right? Ha ha! These are the nobles of America. They have created their own class of de facto exemptions. If you think we need more lawyers and lawyer-politicians, it is the best career choice for your children. A day of major reckoning is looming, however.With your help, all this will change.

Think twice before voting for a lawyer of either party. Corruption of the profession is widespread, self-serving and embodied in the U.S. political structure at every level. It got out of control when pensions for congressman became too attractive for the lazy to pass up.

Kingpins Part II: Pablo Escobar or Members Ofthebar?

2005-05-26T20:30:00.000-07:00

The following examples are by no means exhaustive examples. Please do not get me wrong, I know we have many lawyers of impeccable integrity. Some are members of my own family.We need good, honest lawyers in this country. It looks like we have so many lawyers that the bad ones are creating a terrific PR headache for the others, both professionally and politically.

Suppose judges (politically appointed lawyers) like to think they are highly esteemed pinnacles of their chosen profession. (Not very hard to believe, is it?) Suppose public perception of the legal profession is regularly tarnished, however. Would judges lean toward leniency for rotten lawyers, if that helped control the PR damage? Here are some actual cases for you to consider:

# 1 No kingpins here? Ex-prosecutor, others plead guilty in SC drug case (Columbia-AP) Feb. 18, 2005 - South Carolina attorney general's office announced that three lawyers pleaded guilty to conspiracy to distribute cocaine……..they can all complete their probation in two years if terms of their sentencing are met. A non-lawyer was named a fugitive in a related indictment carrying a 25-year sentence… (blog: Would lawyers who had already conspired to distribute cocaine also have conspired to testify against a non-lawyer for reduced sentences…)?

# 2 Definitely no Kingpin here? Ex-prosecutor's guilty plea caught State Bar unaware (Enric Volante, ARIZONA DAILY STAR) Arizona’s State Bar was unaware that attorney Lourdes Lopez had pleaded guilty to fraud until it learned about it from news reports Lopez resigned as prosecutor for Pima County Attorney's Office in August 2002. A federal judge dismissed the charges after Lopez got in no further trouble and complied with conditions in her plea agreement.

# 3 No Kingpin Even here? Ex-prosecutor faces 11 charges (LINDA FRIEDLIEB, Arkansas Democrat-Gazette April 12, 1997) A federal grand jury in Little Rock charged Dan Harmon, 52, of Benton, businessman Roger C. Walls of Sheridan and Sheridan attorney William A. Murphy with violating the Racketeering Influenced Corrupt Organizations Act.According to the indictment "In reality, the defendants operated the Seventh Judicial District Prosecuting Attorney's Office as a conduit to obtain monetary benefits to themselves and others, and to participate in and conceal criminal activities,''. Harmon faced one charge of racketeering, two of possession with the intent to distribute cocaine hydrochloride, four of conspiracy to extort money, two of conspiracy to manufacture drugs, one of witness tampering and one of retaliation against a witness.In 1999, U.S. District Judge Stephen M. Reasoner sentenced him to eight years in prison, ordered him to pay $16,000 in restitution to victims of two extortion schemes and fined him $25,000.

# 4 No Kingpin Even here? Indictment Charges Former Justice Official, Others With Racketeering Jun. 5, 1995 - The government charged three criminal defense lawyers, including a former, high-level, Justice Department official (Michael Abbell) and 56 others with being members of a racketeering enterprise and participating in the conspiracy that allegedly imported more than 220 tons of cocaine, a charge that carries a mandatory sentence of life in prison.The 161-page indictment also alleges that the three lawyers and three other lawyers who have previously pleaded guilty "prepared false affidavits, delivered drug money to pay legal fees and warned clients of pending charges." In addition, they were charged with helping to launder drug proceeds, hindering prosecutions, fabricating evidence, intimidating government witnesses, and revealing the identity of an informant who investigators say was later murdered by cartel hitman. Abbell was sentenced to 87 months' imprisonment.

Do you see any pattern of trial lawyer corruption and sentencing leniency yet?These lawyers did not see much either: Deputy Attorney General Jamie Gorelick said in a statement that the attorneys' action in the case "goes far beyond zealous representation of a client."Senator John Kerry (D-MA) said only it was inappropriate for Abbell to be "providing expertise to major cocaine traffickers that he obtained while he was working for the U.S. Justice Department."Note: Criminal defense attorneys even complained that the last case highlights troubling breeches of attorney-client confidentiality by the government (Saundra Torry, "Defense Counselors Say Probe Attacks Lawyer-Client Relationship," Washington Post, June 6, 1995, p. A16). Is enough publicity given to cases when lawyers are caught? Could this be due to media bias and links to a certain political party that is lead by the “trial lawyer/criminal defense attorney” profession? Do punishments fit the crime? What would your punishment probably have been in each case? Does the legal system cut lawyers a “professional break? Are lawyers now to be treated as a special class of citizen? Lawyers in general have a duty to report unethical conduct. Whether they have to report on themselves is another question.

2005-05-26T13:17:00.000-07:00

Of seven Democrats who participated in the recent "compromise" on the president's federal judge appointments, all are lawyers. That is significantly higher than the proportion of Senate Democrats as a total who are lawyers (66%).

For the Republican compromisers, 57% were lawyers also significantly higher than the overall proportion of Senate Republicans who are lawyers (40%). A notable member of the "Republic Seven" was previously the single, Republican member of the notorious "Keating Five". His crime, for which Democrat lawyer-politicians saved his butt with the other four (the Democratic party at the time controlled the Senate) raised mortgage rates for ordinary Americans for decades. Might he owe the Dems some favor?

The 14 tell us how they think of themselves as preservationists of a more "collegial" Senate. The statistics lead me to believe we should elect only lawyers to assure collegiality (as if that were a worthy goal by itself). Nor are voters so naive as to believe that the much publicized meetings of the 14 this time, have not secretly occurred at other times. In otherwords, the chicanery factor argues as strongly against election of lawyers to the U.S. Senate as the collegial factor (think of collegial as a codeword for public decorum through private extortion) argues for attorney exclusivity. Sooner or later, Americans must come to grips with those who, only one step removed from con-artists, have gradually subverted the formal separation of powers in the three branches of government through lawyerly collegiality.

Our government is dangerously close to de facto rule by one profession (class rule) that is more evil and corrupt than any racketeering influence or corrupt organization. -Vigilis

EARLY WARNING: Colonization of the Senate

2005-05-23T12:20:00.000-07:00

Colonization of the Senate - Definition: Degradation of the constitutional system of checks and balances on the three, separated branches of government resulting from a single profession's dominance in both the U.S. Senate (lawyers comprise over half of all Senators) and the Federal Judiciary (where lawyers comprise 100%). Individual lawyers can be fine, upstanding people and some even make great, elected officials. The legal profession is also a necessity. The object of this warning is not to deny members of the legal establishment their opportunity to be elected to office, it is to declare the obvious threat to the intended checks and balances devised by this great nation's founders. Currently, the system of checks has been subverted by an imbalance of lawyers. Voters are urged to consider the merit of this warning and use their utmost selectivity before electing or re-electing lawyers of either party to the U.S. Senate. Like parasitic termite infestations, Colonization of the Senate carries serious perils. Lawyers in the Senate present especially unique threats to 'checks and balances' for four reasons. First, the legal profession is given naturally to "judge worship." The deference given judges by lawyers is natural for reasons of job security and career advancement; but it is also much higher than that of ordinary citizens or non-lawyer politicians. Secondly, federal judges are appointed lawyers, and those appointed for life become the epitome of ascendency in the legal profession. Thirdly, lawyers outnumber other professions in at least two of our three branches of government. Senators (6 year terms) hold sway over representatives (elected to only 2 year terms); over 30% of House members are also lawyers. Finally, many of the lawyer-Senators are former trial attorneys or litigators, meaning their professional ethic has allowed conning juries with plausible defenses to free the guilty, seeking minimum sentences for convicts (recidivism boosts lawyer employment as new crimes and trials require three lawyers -a judge, defense attorney and prosecutor). Litigators are often practiced in extortive "out-of-court" settlements and class actions that benefit no one as much as themselves. Unlike termites, Senators can only be exterminated (from office) once every six years. Consequently the legal profession is booming in America with 7,000,000 lawyers fully employed. Why does one country require 70% of the world's lawyers? Interesting, but that is not the point. Simply, the Senate's "collegial" power structure equates as lawyers with the power to make judges or be appointed for life play ball so they never have to go before the wrong judge. What a shame, but the cure for it has been mentioned.

Who Are the U.S. Drug Kingpins?

2005-05-10T12:27:00.000-07:00

Tell the truth. If old enough to have first heard the term "drug kingpin" in 1988, when Title 28 C.F.R. 26.3 became the law of our homeland, did you ever imagine that kingpins would be elusive foreignors instead of clandestine domestics? Had you ever heard of Pablo Escobar? Importation of any illegal commodity in heavy demand enriches domestic financiers. Who are they? Try to name even one. Their return on the underlying investment must beat bank rates, yet where does it go?A former prosecutor has written an interesting book about Jimmy Hoffa's murder (I Heard You Paint Houses, a 2004 best seller by Charles Brandt). You probably missed this book -it was trememdously overshadowed by last year's election cycle. Read it before Hollywood botches the movie. Find out not only who did Hoffa, but who did JFK and why. Heck, even learn why Ramsey Clark was appointed US Attorney General, forcing his Supreme Court Justice dad to step down due to the conflict of interest created. What a son he was! You will also hear confirmation of political links to organized crime and mob links to undercover U.S. operations. What you absolutely will not find out is who was issuing instructions to Russell Bufalino. Hint: not some mafioso in Sicily. Are you starting to form your big picture?Fast forward to 2005. Lawyers comprise 36% of the U.S. House and 53% of the Senate. (Why is it so difficult to find out who is a lawyer*?) We almost had two more lawyers as head of our Executive branch! Lawyers control a major political party and have stealth operatives in the other one. Don't forget...100% of the Supreme Court and the lower courts are already and ALWAYS lawyers. The U.S. electorate is not yet convinced that lawyers' access to power needs to be minimized due to conflict of interest. More on that, later...Question of the day: *Mike Taibi is a...a) journalistb) lawyerc) journalist and lawyerd) neithere) don't care (I 'm a Yellow-dog Democrat)Answer will be given later.Next Time: Pablo Escobar or Members Ofthebar?