Which is a good reason, you don’t want negroes, gays and libruls running Georgia like they run Atlanta do you?
4 Likes
That is not how it works. A lawyer’s ethical duty is to represent the client. The lawyer need not like nor believe the client but still must present the client’s interest. A lawyer may not simply quit in the middle barring some narrowly stated legal basis.
Perhaps a conflict of interest. My question is, what was the legal basis of the AG’s withdrawal? The article sheds no light on this. I Looked up the case file and it has not been updated since last night at midnight.
Again, what was the stated reason given by the AG when seeking leave of court to withdraw?
Don’t blame the Russians. They couldn’t have done this without plenty of domestic traitors of our own. They’re just engaging in statecraft of a devious sort—and at least, at the end of the day, they’re fighting FOR their own country.
It’s the Republican grifter class, paid for by the Republican dark money donor base—fossil fuel, financial, and tech billionaires, vile men like Charles Koch, Robert Mercer, Peter Thiel, et al----who are taking power through a systematic, multi-front assault on our democracy, using weapons like bribery, blackmail, mass propaganda, targeted voter suppression, and, as it turns out, straight up electoral fraud.
And unlike their Russian colleagues, they’re fighting to destroy their own country.
7 Likes
Er, the conflict of interest is the conflict between the duty to the client and the duty to the court. The AG cannot disclose the basis for withdrawal because that would be in breach of the duty to the client.
Edit: this explains it in layman’s terms.
https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/i-told-lawyer-i-m-planning-telling-lie-the-stand-what-happen.html
7 Likes
Er, it’s how you phrase the conflict. If you code it one way, the judge can intuit it is a prospective testimonial issue. Coded another way it means, my office is now investigating this schmuck and we can’t firewall this case off. I’m asking if a reporter can shed some light on what kind of conflict is alleged? You don’t “quit” a case because you’re “embarrassed”.
Likely some of Session’s people are working diligently on the case.
1 Like
Karen Handel needs to be jailed.
2 Likes
The state AG’s office represents the state and state employees.
If those employees do something illegal or damaging to the case, the AG’s office can withdraw, laving the employee to pay for his or her own counsel.
Unfortunately, the US Constitution explicitly grants full control of all State Elections solely to the STATES.
It would take a Constitutional Amendment to change that.
And the AG would set that out in writing. They didn’t “quit”. I am asking a journalist to investigate and tell us what the
AG’s basis to withdraw was. It may be enlightening.
I tried looking this up on my own by looking at the online court file from Georgia. Unfortunately the files I can access we’re last updated last night. The AG seems to have filed something today. A journalist has told us this occurred. My question is why? Find out the basis for the withdrawal and update.
The Constitution, Art. I, Sec. 4, specifically gives Congress the power to regulate the “Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections.”
The states have considerable power over elections, but Congress can pass legislation to affect federal elections at any time.
This would include standardized early voting procedures, voting apparatus, times the polls are open, and anything else Congress wants to weigh in on.
7 Likes
It’s glaringly obvious.
The ham-handed defendants wiped the server clean, destroying evidence.
The AG’s office said, “You’re on your own now.”
3 Likes
Kemp, who is running for governor in 2018, has denied ordering the data destruction or knowing about it in advance. His office’s general counsel issued a two-page report on Monday claiming Kennesaw State officials followed “standard IT practices” in wiping the server that “were not undertaken to delete evidence.” In its initial statement on the server wiping on Oct. 26, Kemp’s office called KSU’s wiping of the server reckless, inexcusable and inept.
In the Red States, obstruction of justice is Standard IT practice…
3 Likes
10-to-1 Kobach ignores this clear case of voter fraud.
3 Likes
I’d be careful what you wish for… A federally mandated process could be subject to some wretched provisions. To paraphrase Tip O’Neill, elections, even national ones, are actually quite local, and I do think it’s advantageous on the whole that local jurisdictions police themselves. I think that to expand the process to the national level would invite very skilled racketeers to run roughshod over us all. Just think back to the Brooks Brothers Riot debacle or the slippery snakes Kobach and von Spakovsky, who will stop at nothing to steal, cheat and obfuscate.
State AGs and County Attorneys typically have to represent government employees. I think the laws have provisions allowing them to instruct particular defendants to hire their own counsel (reimbursed) when there are conflicts of interest with other named government defendants, or where someone does something nuclear like this.
I don’t see how mail-in ballots - which pretty much have to be mailed-to as well - don’t discriminate against persons who move frequently or who e.g. live periodically with relatives and friends. I can’t help but think of the time we asked my dad where he had lived when we were driving through his old neighborhood in Chicago - and he started pointing. Over and over. Turns out his family moved a lot, often more than once a year - sometimes a couple of blocks away, sometimes to a different floor in the same building, but always in the same parish. To him “moving” meant going to a different church, not living at a different address.
Anyway, I know they do that in Oregon and it works there. Where I live I wouldn’t trust the carrier to deliver it to me reliably. The mail on our street goes to the wrong address all the time. (Contractors, not USPS employees do our route.)
3 Likes
That is not how it works. The lawyer cannot just leave the client high and dry. Further, the lawyer can not say “Your Honour, my client destroyed evidence and therefore I must withdraw.”
Yes but how did this AG get court permission to withdraw?
What kind of IT standards were they adhering to when a Database as critical as election data was not backed up or replicated? No credible organization would destroy critical data that soon unless it is transnational or data that is generated by the system itself. Many people these days even back up data on their personal computers on separate medium just in case the hard drive crashes.
5 Likes