Full disclosure: I'm more in Richard Nixon's corner than not, and therefore am predisposed to loathe Richard Ben-Veniste from the get go.¹ I find him repellent, and have done so since I started reading about Watergate back in the very early 1990s. From what I understand, he's been a pest to Republicans since the days of the first big Democratic witch-hunt in Washington, i.e. Watergate.

Anyways. Ed Moltzen of Late Final has come up with a very interesting piece of information indicating that perhaps Mr. Ben-Veniste has not been as compliant with ethical standards as perhaps he should be.

The bottom line: His law firm (Mayer, Brown, Rowe & Maw) is representing claimants in the litigation over the collapse of the World Trade Center. Mr. Ben-Veniste just happens to have access to a lot of otherwise classified information that other parties would have to use the Freedom of Information Act and/or extensive discovery procedures to get at, if at all.

I do not mean to suggest that Mr. Ben-Veniste would act in any way contrary to the rules of professional responsibility, but we're using the New York Times standard of "appearance of impropriety", not any actual objective standard. Perhaps Mr. Ben-Veniste should recuse himself from the Commission, or perhaps his firm should withdraw from the suit?

I'll probably wind up asking one of my intelligent professors about this, since I'm always hazy on this part of the rules of professional responsibility. Since I'll probably never be asked to be on a commission like this or be in a giant firm, these concerns are not my problem.

Read the whole thing. Very interesting. ¹ To put a wiseacre's spin on it, allow me to quote Lynyrd Skynyrd: "Watergate does not bother me", and my conscience does not bother me, I tell you true. Yes yes, criminal activity is bad, blah blah.

Posted by: Country Pundit at 12:33 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 320 words, total size 2 kb.