It would seem that it’s theatrical dramatics like Terwilliger’s that *Mezmerize* the Legal Defense Funds and their Losing Clients.

So, Jeffress and Terwilliger do their Pardon Dances, and the ‘interested parties’ plus their backers are squealing with barely muffled anticipatory delight.

It’s because, imvho, when they go theatrical – it’s the ‘wink-and-nod’ – they’re playing to Bush the Deciderer.

So, Terwilliger gets the big-bucks because he knows ‘How the Game is Played’: Make Bush feel goofy-loyal to his bumbling, hooligan henchpeople, and it’s just like pushing back on the head of the Pez Pardon Dispenser.

So, even if they’ve Lost the Battle in Court, they can Still Wink for a Pardon, and Get it with a Nod – and Win the War.

I wonder what bar he belonged to before his decision to sit for the DC Bar, bc it’s not as if Hunton doesn’t have more than one office. [ok- catching up comments while I’m typing and Scribe has the same wonderment; yes Kyle, there really is a Santa Clause, it was in the very fine fine print of your K to screw the country] The pending admission thing, though, could just be that they’ve sent in the app and it hasn’t been processed yet – I’ve known some reciprocity admissitons to take a month or two. I agree on the letter writing though – um, doesn’t DC have a Congresswoman now? To be honest, as weasely as he was, I think Sampson looked like a giant next to Gonzales, McNulty, Goodling and even Margolis – he at least came, testified (albeit with big gaps) and didn’t take the 5th or require an immunity deal.

2/3 – Terwilliger & firm are handling the Metcalfe lawsuit and IIRC the Texas prisons suit for Gonzales too. To what extent bills are going where – I won’t pretend to know, but there’s an off chance taxpayers are picking up the tab for some of the atty firing crim investigation as well as atty discrimination civil suit – I dunno.

13 – Hunton is really more a “major” VA firm than DC firm, but like all the biggies in VA and Maryland and all the biggies everywhere that do lobbyist and defense work, it has offices around and in DC. Also TX, CA, FL, NC, overseas … They could find him a perch if they wanted.

IF he had been disbarred or disciplined, there would be a public record of it. Simply, the Courts or Bar Associations that admit attorneys to the various state bars do their disciplining in public. (A note to the non-lawyers: it varies from state to state as to how attorneys are admitted to practice. In some states, licensing and admission are run by the state, usually through the state court system. In other states, licensing and admission is done by the State Bar Association, at core a private association with the public duty of licensing and admitting people. Those states are the so-called “mandatory bar association” states – you can’t practice without being a member of the bar association. In other states, it’s optional.)

IF a court had disciplined him, that discipline would be a matter of public record, as in a court order or opinion stating that (a) he’d been brought up on disciplinary grounds, (b) that he’d been ordered to show why he should not be disciplined, (c) that he’d been ordered disciplined and (d) the quantum of discipline. It would have been published in the official reports. Since I’m not a member of the bar in a mandatory bar association state, I cannot say how the news that he’d been disciplined would have been published, but suffice it to say it would be a public record.

More likely, IMHO, are one or both of two alternatives.
Alternative (1): self-disclosure. On his application to the DC Bar, he would have to have listed “pending” or possibly “threatened” litigation or investigations of him, regardless of whether they were administrative, civil, or criminal. One of the standard questions on the application is to the effect of “have you ever been a party in a civil, administrative or criminal action?” In other words, everything from “did you get sued over that car accident?” to “were you ever charged with anything that could conceivably bear jail time?” And, that includes all those things in juvenile court which they told you were “Sealed”. They weren’t.
If his answer was “yes” (and it is for almost anyone), then the follow up is “tell us all about it”.
I’d suspect the fact that the Congress hauled him in front of it and he won a TPM award for best performance in the field of testimonial stupidity, plus being the subject of innumerable blog posts and youtubes, got caught in this screen.

There are also provisions which require you to allow the bar authorities to have a look at your criminal record – including a waiver of letting them look at federal and state databases about you.

And then there is “have you ever had a security clearance?” and “if so, has it ever been revoked or limited?”

And “have you ever been fired from a job, forced to resign in lieu of being fired, or otherwise been compelled to give up some work?” followed by “please tell us all about it”

And, also, “tell us about every job you ever had and who you worked for, and allow us to talk to them”.

The application to a bar is even more intrusive than the application to work in the Obama administration.

Alternative (2): people complaining about you. This is where the idea that people writing letters may have had some effect, and I think this is what you were talking about.

There is no reason not to, and every reason to, write letters to the Bars which had admitted to practice the Bush crime family’s consiglieri – there is no telling when they may decide to get admitted somewhere else, and no telling when they might get into a bind in some other case where the bar authorities would take a look at the file and say “hey, ten thousand people complained about this guy – let’s make an example of him”.

Or, “Convicted Felon Gonzales” eventually.

If there is no Republican rain to make looking ahead, and the law firm only took him on as a favor to Karl, using the subpoena as a good excuse to cut costs by dumping him works out for the firm.

I hear he and the other Rove proteges ran up some pretty stiff legal bills during the USA probe, and maybe they will have incentives to testify truthfully and turn state’s evidence if they are not getting enough wingnut welfare.

It’s interesting, going through the firms DC office roster, to see that they’ve got other lawyers not admitted to the DC bar. In fact, if you look, you’ll see that several lawyers, including partners aren’t admitted to various bars. Wonder why it was a problem for Sampson…

Boxturtle (Really, a lawyer should be able make a lie hang together)