Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Legal Schnauzer: Holder's Former Law Firm Brags About Its GOP Ties

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
mod mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-18-09 01:02 PM
Original message
Legal Schnauzer: Holder's Former Law Firm Brags About Its GOP Ties
Eric Holder's former law firm brags on its Web site about its role in protecting Karl Rove's e-mails stored on a Republican National Committee server. In other words, Holder's firm played a major role in obscuring the truth behind the U.S. attorney firings and Bush-era political prosecutions. Does Holder not have an enormous conflict of interest on these issues? Has he made those conflictts known? Are we supposed to trust Holder to get to the bottom of Bush-administration abuses?


TUESDAY, AUGUST 18, 2009
Holder's Former Law Firm Brags About Its GOP Ties

We recently learned that Attorney General Eric Holder's old law firm has alarmingly close ties to the Republican National Committee (RNC) and key figures from the George W. Bush administration.

Now we learn that the firm, Covington & Burling, actually brags on its Web site about its role in helping protect Karl Rove's e-mails that were stored on RNC servers.

Alabama attorney and Siegelman-case whistleblower Jill Simpson helped break the initial report about Holder's old firm. And Douglas Yates, an alert Legal Schnauzer reader from Fairbanks, Alaska, has added to it by revealing that Covington & Burling actually brags about its handiwork on behalf of the RNC--and Karl Rove.

Yates spotted this gem on the C&B Web site:


We represented the Republican National Committee in connection with investigations by the House Judiciary Committee and House Oversight and Government Reform Committees regarding US attorney firings and the hosting of e-mail accounts for White House officials.

-snip

http://legalschnauzer.blogspot.com/2009/08/holders-form...


Hat Tip MCM. SAME AS IT ALWAYS WAS :mad:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
berni_mccoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-18-09 01:04 PM
Response to Original message
1. What a reach. A firm can't brag about it's success? Oh and Holder worked there. How many DUers
work for Republican run companies?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mod mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-18-09 01:07 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Well Whistleblower Jill Simpson certainly thinks it's a conflict of interest:
"It seems Covington denied the RNC e-mails to the House Judiciary Committee on the firing of the nine U.S. attorneys and the political prosecutions. What that means is that Holder's very firm denied the e-mails in the Don Siegelman case, and the Paul Minor case. In fact they have been the ones negotiating with Congress, and I don't believe they have ever turned over the RNC e-mails at Chattanooga. So there you have it--Holder's firm protected Karl Rove from turning over the e-mails on the nine U.S. attorneys and the Siegelman and Minor matters, all while Holder was at that firm."


Don't you think he should recuse himself from anything related to the RNC email scandal including the Seigelman case?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
berni_mccoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-18-09 01:11 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. Was Holder involved in the case? Your OP title is also misleading
The firm doesn't have ties to the GOP. It defended a member of the GOP in the US Attorney case. And the fact that his former firm and Holder had no involvement in the case means squat as to what Holder should do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mod mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-18-09 01:20 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. My OP title is verbatim from Legal Schnauzer and I absolutely feel it is a conflict of
Edited on Tue Aug-18-09 01:39 PM by mod mom
interest:

A conflict of interest occurs when an individual or organization (such as a policeman, lawyer, insurance adjuster, politician, engineer, executive, director of a corporation, medical researchscientist, physician, writer, editor, or any other entrusted individual or organization) has an interest that might compromise their actions. The presence of a conflict of interest is independent from the execution of impropriety.



Review of Governors Conviction Sought

By JOHN SCHWARTZ and CHARLIE SAVAGE
Published: April 21, 2009

Less than a month after the Justice Department asked a judge to drop the case against former Senator Ted Stevens of Alaska because of prosecutorial misconduct, 75 former state attorneys general from both parties have urged Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. to conduct a similar investigation of the prosecution of former Gov. Don Siegelman of Alabama, who was convicted nearly three years ago on bribery and corruption charges.

In a letter to Mr. Holder, the attorneys general said Mr. Siegelmans defense lawyers had raised gravely troublesome facts about his prosecution that raise questions about the fairness and due process of the trial.

We believe that if prosecutorial misconduct is found, as in the case of Senator Ted Stevens, then dismissal should follow in this case as well, the group said in the letter, which was organized by Robert Abrams, a former attorney general of New York.

-snip

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/22/us/22justice.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mod mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-18-09 01:31 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. Here is Whistle blower, Jill Simpson's Op-Ed piece on it:
Eric Holder's Conflict of Interest

by Dana Jill Simpson Page 1 of 1 page(s)


For months, we have been trying to get to the bottom of why Eric Holder would not really investigate the cases of Mr. Siegelman and Mr. Scrushy, Mr. Minor, the two other judges in Mississippi and Charles Walker. Well, I finally have the answer . I got it from writing my Greg Craig article that was located on the Jason Leopold website Public record.

I got a tip and I researched it. And boy, was I shocked at what I learned. Seems Mr. Holder, before being selected Attorney General of the United States of America, worked for a firm called Covington and Burling. The tip I got was that the firm had a very important client whose name was George W. Bush and they represented a very important organization I am sure ya'll all have heard of - the Republican National Committee. I was in shock when I checked it and it was true. My favorite research item I ran across is when they were protecting the RNC from having to turn over Karl Rove's emails that were run on the RNC Servers. It shocked me. Plus I found it mighty interesting that AG Eric Holder never enlightened anyone about his conflict of coming from a big Washington DC law firm that represented the Republican National Committee and George W. Bush in the 2000 election contest.

But then, it all made sense to me. He would have had to appoint a special A.G. to be over the Stevens case, over the Tobin case, and over the Kott case, and over the Abramoff/Feeney case. But if he just kept his mouth shut maybe just maybe no one would catch him dismissing all those cases. Which no one did until the tip came in. It has long been reported that the expenses in those cases were picked up by the RNC. That same RNC that paid A.G. Holder's law firm, that same law firm then paid A.G. Holder over two million dollars last year. Shame on A.G. Holder! He had an ethical duty to tell the citizens of America he had a conflict in investigating all these cases and all the torture cases. Instead, he tried to ignore it or hide it instead of doing the right thing and getting out of the cases.

Additionally, he has ignored to date all the Democrats in this country who are complaining and have proof that they were politically targeted by the RNC and Karl Rove. He has not done the right thing - ask President Obama to appoint a special counsel, all along knowing he has a conflict because of his firm's representation of the RNC. Since Holder has done all this, he should be immediately removed from this position of power. Innocent men are in jail and he has played games.

-snip

http://www.opednews.com/articles/Eric-Holder-s-Conflict...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KittyWampus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-18-09 01:10 PM
Response to Original message
3. this is called "guilt by association" and it really isn't cricket.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-18-09 03:34 PM
Response to Reply #3
8. Very precisely, association is the problem. If we had a shadow government,
you could say Covington has been representing it for a long time. It was while at Covington that Holder rep'd Chiquita against the people whose relatives had been killed by deaths squads, remember? Covington has a lot of "important clients".

I like Eric Holder and it still makes me deeply uncomfortable that Obama went to Covington for his Attorney General.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-18-09 03:11 PM
Response to Original message
7. Yep. Covington is a BFEE sewer. I'd like to know if
Edited on Tue Aug-18-09 03:11 PM by EFerrari
they're cutting Lanny Davis his checks from Chiquita for representing the coup right how.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Feb 28th 2020, 11:31 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC