Comments
Please wait...
Comments are closed.
Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.
is a proud member of the
media network
media network
All contents © Index Newspapers LLC
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
And saying you have a degree in Economics when you minored in Economics is a dumb, neophyte mistake. Like you might expect from someone running for high office with no relevant experience.
2. more broadly, and in all honesty -- meaning rising above legalisms -- here we have two candiates both with just several years in civil litigation, both totally unqualified as neither one (a) was in charge of any major civil litigation and (b) neither one managed lots of other lawyers on all their major civil litigation.
Ladenburg should be in this race. It;s our loss the process gives us two unqualified candidates.
Prior to joining the Justice Department, Reagan lived in Bellevue, Washington, and practiced law for several years with the law firm, Inslee, Best, Doezie & Ryder, P.S.
Dunn could no more include his months of work as a Rule 9 in his "lengthy complex civil practice" than a paralegal or legal assistant could. And his own website inflates his resume even more - he couldn't have qualified as a Rule 9 until Fall 1997 and could only work part time during the school year (that's an ABA rule). How that all works out to "several years" is simple republican math.
Goldy, you might like to think it's because you're partisan that people sometimes dismiss your work, but really - it's the work itself that's not as good as you think. It's not about you, it's about the fruit of your labor. There are partisans, hacks, and partisan hacks breaking their stories big all the time.
Even your Slog sycophants don't care.
That said, if my work is the problem Gus, perhaps you might have the courtesy of pointing out the many times where I am factually wrong, or where my analysis obviously unsupported?
So I use the word "fuck" and a few other obscenities from time to time. So I openly disclose my biases (so that readers can understand me in that context). But honestly, truly: Find me another a journalist who has consistently written at more technical depth on any number of issues, from legal cases to tax structure to the current arena deal. Nobody in this state does the technical writing on public policy that I do. Nobody.
At first I thought you were hyping this beyond his statements, and then this morning went back and read his statements, and yah, total lying. "In private practice" could be fudged as "I worked there." "My private practice" is where he lies. I would think any ethical lawyer would either pressure him for correction or distance themselves from his, once again, lie.
I didn't and never would say your work isn't good. You should certainly continue taking pride in your work. But if you could only not be so proud of it, if you see the distinction. Then you might see some of what I'm talking about. Or not; I can only imagine how hard it must be to put yourself in the shoes of your readers.
*sniff* I so could win a pulitzer, too. I could, you guys. *sniff*
bloo bloo bloo no one likes me (because I'm a pompous hack)
Real lawyers say they are lawyers when they work at a firm before they are admitted. They do not become rule 9 interns. Frankly, this lying discussion is a bit hairsplitting, much like the bad lawyers of the world who play gotcha on technical fouls instead of getting to the meat of the issue, which is this. It's not that Dunn's "lying," it's that even if he wasn't he'd still be totally unqualified -- just like Ferguson -- because being 2, 3 or 4.5 yerars as a junior associate or assistant us attorney simply doesn't mean you can lead major national litigation like suits against Bank of America, Chse, or JP Morgan. Or Regence. THAT's complex civil litigation. CArrying the senrior lawyers' briefcases for 2 years or 4.5 years is really a nonissue, if you want to be serious. The person best qualified is unfortunately running for supreme court, and it's john ladenburg, who does have major complex civil litigation experience. I doubt Dunn or Fergusan has even done one TRIAL that lasted more than two days.
I convicted 5 people in those trials, as a Rule 9. You are wrong Goldy, you are not a lawyer, you don't understand the law and you asked a political hack of a biased law professor whose opinion carries little if any weight in the legal community because he so completely biased in his legal views. Sorry but try to find another hit piece because this isn't going to make sense to lawyers, who actually have been Rule 9s, let alone the general public.
Get them talking about what they did as lawyers. What they learned. Ask them to publish a list of their top ten cases. Then a real reporter or the public could you know, go read their work as a lawyer. It's on file at the courts. It's not secret. It's lazy not to look it up.
I suspect neither one is at all qualified to be AG.
Being a 4th year associate or a 2d year associate just isn't enough experience.