From my background I never thought about it that way.

If the client is a corporation, the lawyer is known as “house counsel” and usually advises the company concerning legal issues related to its business activities.

our life of tomorrow: Our life is the creation of our mind.

Many blogs have stopped using trackbacks because dealing with spam became too burdensome.. This is similar to comment spam but avoids

I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view

Many blogs have stopped using trackbacks because dealing with spam became too burdensome. (Blogger now has backlinks – very similar

I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view

Challenge antifouling payday loans for Scientists

[...] There is a wide variety of prices and quality between manufacturers [...]

It’s sick and twisted and evidence of Rove’s evil genius. Looks like it’s finally can bite him in the balls. I hope he twists for a good long time.

Although I am glad to see you rushing in to protect our wrongly fired U.S. Attorneys, I must ask you – WHERE HAVE YOU BEEN? The very same political network, “good old boy clique,” that fired these attorneys, has been around for years attacking other federal government employees who dare to speak out against wrongdoing. Yet you, dear Congress, have done nothing to protect these brave souls who dare become National Security Whistleblowers.

Currently there is no real whistleblower protection for government employees on the front line of our national security (Border Patrol Agents, Customs Agents, Transportation Security Agents, etc.). Many of these government employees have endured wrongful firings, harassment, threats, and other retaliation on an enormous scale for simply doing the right thing. They have witnessed extreme instances of waste, fraud, abuse and corruption that they are required by law to report. For many of them, what they have witnessed are criminal acts by their mid-level and sometimes very high-level managers. If they don’t report these abuses, they the employees may be criminally charged with a felony (Misprision of Felony). Yet when they do the right thing, the whistleblowers are most certain to be severely retaliated against by the people benefiting from the wrongdoing.

Moreover, this has been documented and presented to Congress repeatedly by numerous organizations like The Government Accountability Project (GAP), the Project On Government Oversite (POGO), and the Patrick Henry Center. All three of these organizations list scores of National Security Whistleblowers that have testified repeatedly before Congress in different forums (e.g. the 911 Commission; the Blue Ribbon Commission; Whistleblower Counsel). Yet the Whistleblower Protection Act that was authored and sponsored by Senators Akaka and Grassley, and has passed the Senate, sits idle for months now on the House floor.

As you rush to protect these more powerful federal government employees (U.S Attorneys) who are often hand picked by their home state Senators, remember, there are others who have suffered much more because they have risks much more via the national security issues that they have reported. I doubt that these U.S. Attorneys will have to file bankruptcy because they are being “blackballed” by corrupt government officials, in the same way that National Security Whistleblowers do. I doubt that these U.S. Attorneys will fear the threats and intimidation to themselves and their families; repeated frivolous internal affairs investigations; the passing over of earned promotions, and numerous other tools that government managers have at their disposal to discredit whistleblowers and SHUT THEM UP.

Yet you, Congress, point the “Political Finger” at the folks who have fired these U.S. Attorneys, while you sit and allow much worse behavior to continue for others. Maybe someone should wave that same “Political Finger” back at themselves. Why is it that the U.S. Attorneys have been given preferential treatment over other government employees who, quite frankly, have put their necks much more on the line for this country than the U.S. Attorneys?

Don’t get me wrong, I’m sure that the firing of these attorneys is political, morally wrong, and perhaps illegal – BUT SO WHAT! Why are you rushing to their aid over the dead bodies of National Security Whistleblowers who were also government employees – and I do mean literally dead bodies. Numerous whistleblowers have had their lives so destroyed by doing the right thing, that they have died of heart problems due to stress, and/or have committed suicide. The whistleblower cases that I have witnessed, including my own, are much more egregious and appalling than what has happened to the U.S. Attorneys. One may conclude that the answer to this question is that U.S. Attorneys are simply more powerful in their positions, and can be of more assistance to Congress in said positions – hence fostering the notion that this sudden interest for Congress to protect them is merely POLITICAL! Therefore, while you waive the “Political Finger” at this administration for firing these attorneys, please take a close look in the mirror at the other end of that very same finger – which is pointing straight back at you! I would encourage you to provide protection to ALL GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, not just the influential ones.

Sincerely,

Darlene Fitzgerald
National Security Whistleblower & proud of it
Author: “BorderGate, the story the government doesn’t want you to read”
http://www.BorderGate.net

However, even so, isn’t it illegitimate for a sitting President to have his Justice Department: a.) pressure their Attorney’s to bring bogus charges against the opposition [as may have happened in New Jersey]; b.) Punish them if they do not [as in Iglesias]; and c.) punish them if they indict Republicans [as is it is becoming more and mroe clear that this happened with Carol Lam in California].

Let me put it another: if Hillary Clinton wins the election and does the same thing [tells her attorneys that their main allegiance is to her and not to the law, and that they must go after republicans even if the charges are bogus, and that if they do not, or if they go after Democrats breaking the law, that they will be punished]…well, wouldn’t you go totally apeshit? And if not, why not? If Hillary Clinton had a provision slipped into the next huge tome of the Patriot Act giving her the ability to hire political hacks who are more loyal to her than the law, and without the safeguard of congressional oversight that was in place prior to 2006], wouldn’t you be up in arms? If not, why not?

You’re WRONG, that the President needs a REASON to fire a U.S. Attorney.

As you, yourself, said, they serve at the pleasure of the President.

He is FREE to fire them “just because” – no reason needed. PERIOD.

None of the verbal hand-wringing or moch indignation on the part of Liberals (neo-progs) is going to change that…

If Congress does not like it – let them change the LAW.

Hey, maybe they can pass a NON-BINDING resolution voicing their opposition to firing U.S. attorneys.