Froomkin, of all people, may have (I’m gonna say inadvertently) buried a lede in his Wednesday column. Quoting an AP piece on the subject of Susan Ralston’s Dance of the Seven Veils of Immunity, there is the line
Waxman’s memo is worth a read. As Waxman notes: “In September 2006, Chairman Davis and Ranking Member Waxman released a staff report summarizing what the Committee had learned from a review of billing records and e-mails provided to the Committee by Mr. Abramoff’s former lobbying firm, Greenberg Traurig.
Ralston, of course, was Abramoff’s former top aide who he conveeeeeniently handed off to the Dark Lord when one K. Rove needed a top aide when they completed their hijacking of the US executive branch. Think of Ralston as the hijacker who guarded the cockpit door against passengers trying to bang it open with the food cart.
But what makes this particular story jump out at me is that a few weeks ago Lambert ran across a record of some Abramoff-related emails as we were digging into the [ILLEGAL] private communications net we’ve been calling “gwb43.com” run for the Republican National Committee [RNC.com] by Smartech Corp out of Chattanooga TN. [with backup storage at Coptix.com also of C’noogie—wouldn’t want Jeffy to think we’d forgotten him!]
In the header was an Abramoff message—I forget who it was to, might have been Ralston herself—and the return address caught my eye for having the letters “gt” in it. I suggested then that this could very well mean that Abramoff had set up his mail so that a copy of it went automatically to Greenberg-Traurig, thinking of it as a law firm.
This would seem sensible, if of course one were an amoral slime of a crook. Route any communication that by rights ought to get you sent to the Big House through your lawyer and presto! it becomes privileged communication and the lawyers will all die hideous horrible deaths before turning it over to the coppers.
I forgot G-T is like that old Saturday Night Live skit about the white foamy product which nobody can remember the use of, so they do an ad proclaiming “It’s a floor wax…AND a dessert topping!” G-T is a law firm AND a lobbyist shop. And they’re a hell of a lot bigger than Jack Abramoff, so it makes sense that if their various streams of cashflow are being endangered by this one crooked bastard they’d throw him over the railing when the sharks came circling around below.
This could get veeeeeeddddy eeeenteresting shortly.
[Edited in a couple of places, including the headline, to put the “r” in Greenberg-Traurig which I am always forgetting how to spell particularly when in a hurry.]
Front page
"As your lobbyist, I advise you...."
Gack. What a cesspool. Thanks, Xan.
Please, can we just bring back honest graft? My head is still hurting from Monica’s testimony yesterday. After awhile, that little girl voice started hitting the inside of my skull like a jackhammer.
No authoritarians were tortured in the writing of this post.
Crimeinny, Can Rove Do That?
I mean is it legal for a government employee to retain as a lawyer for whatever purpose a law firm which is also a lobbyist? How can a lobbyist not have business in front of the government?
Can we now say that our own federal government is a wholy owned subsidiary of the Republican party?
Astonishing catch, Xan. Keep on it.
G-T was Abramoff's firm,
not Rove’s…as far as I know now that you mention it.
This however points to the underlying problem in what we call for shorthand the “Abramoff problem.” He’s the lever we’re using to pry the lid off the maggot-filled pit which is the lobbying industry, but he’s just one maggot among many. The problem is the pit itself and the way it operates.
All these “ethics reform” bills which go into excruciating detail about the size of the burger, whether it can be Kobe beef or mere ground sirloin, and the number and quantities of condiments used by the congressmember if a “lobbyist” is buying the meal, and whether tickets to sporting events are allowable only if the seat is horribly located in nosebleed territory and behind a structual post, miss the point entirely.
“Ethics reform” has to get at the root of the problem which is that these fucking “lobbying shops” are writing the fucking legislation later rubber stamped by Congress. I care a lot more about how Abramoff setup he did for his masters in the Marianas Islands than about some quibbly shit of fancy dinners at his restaurant.
More later, this is crunch day, but to answer your question above, I don’t see any way anybody, gummint employee or not, can be prevented from selecting the legal counsel of his/her preference, no matter what goes on in other divisions of said legal counsel’s firm. This might be another matter worthy of further reform.
Floor wax, dessert topping
Yes! Someone else remembers my favorite sketch from the early days of SNL! Far funnier than the more canonical “Land Shark”, and miles beyond the Bees and Coneheads. And useful, too!
Abusing A-C Privilege
Not quite. Ethical lawyers would never do this because they know if they get caught abusing A-C Privilege, they might lose the privilege entirely and potentially have to cough up everything.
The fact that G-T even hired Abramoff does tend to make one speculate.