Carter Page, a former low-level Trump campaign adviser whose Russia connections have been under scrutiny, is not a lawyer, an economist or a telecom expert. Nonetheless, he believes he can assist the court in evaluating the merger of AT&T and Time Warner.

On Tuesday, he filed a pro se motion asking for leave to file an amicus brief in the case.

His submission is… how can I put it? Not good.

It's one of those documents that hurts your head to read. Lots of big words that don't make much sense when strung together, topped by a big dollop of conspiracy theory.

This is why pro se defendants get a bad name. They file stuff like this:

“The related diverse array of obstruction of justice abuses in violation of many Constitutional rights primarily stemmed from illicit activities undertaken by major participants in the U.S. telecommunications-media oligopoly and their illegal de facto joint venture marketing partners in the U.S. Government (“USG”) propaganda network. Based on preliminary accounts from these institutions and associated unfulfilled appeals by members of Congress, Dr. Page is believed to have been illicitly hacked in 2016.”

To the extent you can figure out what's going on, his prime grievance seems to be with Verizon and its subsidiary Yahoo for publishing what he says are false allegations (what he terms “perhaps the most dangerous, reckless, irresponsible and historically-instrumental moments in modern day sensational crime journalism”) that he met with two sanctioned Russian officials.

My colleague Cogan Schneier reports that Page is enrolled in a part-time L.L.M. program at a “prominent law school” and will begin coursework in January 2018.

Summer associate anyone?

|

Judge Not

You don't have to be a flaming liberal to conclude that Brett “I've-never-tried-a-case-before” Talley and Jeff “Transgender-kids-are-part-of-Satan's plan” Mateer have no business being federal judges.

Rather unexpectedly, Senator Chuck Grassley seems to have realized this as well. The Iowa Republican, who chairs the Senate Judiciary Committee, told CNN on Tuesday that he is urging President Donald Trump to reconsider the nominations.

“I would advise the White House not to proceed,” he said.

As far revelations go, it's a bit belated, considering Grassley on Nov. 9 voted to advance Talley's nomination to the full Senate. But hey, it's something.

Meanwhile, the Senate on Tuesday voted 50 to 48 to confirm Leonard Steven Grasz to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eight Circuit, despite his “not qualified” rating from the American Bar Association.

Deep sigh.

University of Arkansas School of Law professor Cynthia Nance did the ABA's first Grasz investigation, conducting 183 (!) confidential interviews. Fenwick & West commercial litigation head Laurence Pulgram, a former chair of the ABA's litigation section, did a follow-up evaluation, interviewing another 24 lawyers and judges associated with Grasz.

Their findings: Gratz is reported to be “gratuitously rude” and his “passionately-held social agenda appeared to overwhelm and obscure the ability to exercise dispassionate and unbiased judgment.”

And what did the Senate do with this thorough, meticulous research by two esteemed lawyers?

It gave Gratz a lifetime appointment to the bench.

|

Glass Houses, Trump Edition

Donald Trump likes to tweet about people “begging” him for favors.

He did it on Tuesday, claiming New York Senator Kirsten Gillibrand “would come to my office 'begging' for campaign contributions not so long ago (and would do anything for them).”

Er, excuse me?

He also did it to political strategist Cheryl Jacobus, who in 2015 turned down an offer to work on the Trump campaign. In early 2016, she criticized Trump on CNN, opining that he “comes off like a third grader faking his way through an oral report on current affairs.”

In response, Trump tweeted that she “begged us for a job. We said no and she went hostile.” He also called Jacobus “a real dummy” (which for the record is exactly what a third grader would say) and followed up with, “Major loser, zero credibility.”

Jacobus sued Trump for defamation in New York state court. On Tuesday, she lost her appeal when the appellate division upheld the trial court's decision in January to dismiss the case.

She was represented by Jay Butterman of Buttermann & Kahn.

“The alleged defamatory statements are too vague, subjective, and lacking in precise meaning (i.e., unable to be proven true or false) to be actionable,” the appellate decision stated.

Trump was represented by Lawrence Rosen and Patrick McPartland of Larocca Hornik Rosen Greenberg & Blaha, who argued that the tweets were “pure opinion.”

Which as a defense, is a bit ironic from a guy who says he wants to loosen libel laws so he can sue people for writing things that are “purposely negative and horrible.”

Like a tweet calling someone a dummy?

|

More Legal News

9th Circuit Strikes Constitutional Challenge to the Arbitration Act
Arbitration champion Andrew Pincus of Mayer Brown scores again, this time on behalf of AT&T.

How Jones Day Cornered the Market on SCOTUS Clerks
A fair estimate would place the cost of recruiting the clerks at more than $10 million—not counting their salaries—over the last five years.

Lessons From Long-Shot SCOTUS Clerks: Work Hard, Stand Out, Stay Grounded
More fromLaw.com's SCOTUS series—the stories of four unlikely clerks.

Iran Sanctions-Busting Case May Test Limits of US Jurisdiction
When can the U.S. government criminally prosecute conduct by a foreign person that occurred outside the United States?

Shakespeare Mock Trial Brings Comedic Relief for Judges and Lawyers
Valuable precedent for cases involving people who accidentally marry shipwreck survivors after mistaking them for the person they love, except it's actually the shipwreck survivor's twin sister in disguise.

2017: The Year of Inconsistent FCPA Enforcement
A year marked by inconsistency in how monitorships were applied, recidivist companies were treated and what cases prompted both civil and criminal penalties.

Court's Expert Recommends Limit on Attorney Fees for NFL Settlement Lawyers
The size of the $112.5 million fee request undercuts the argument that counsel needs to be paid additional money.

SDNY Chief Judge Colleen McMahon Takes on Sexual Harassment
“It is a very good thing that the workplace's dirty little secret has finally been subjected to a healthy dose of Justice Louis Brandeis' strongest disinfectant.”

|

Carter Page, a former low-level Trump campaign adviser whose Russia connections have been under scrutiny, is not a lawyer, an economist or a telecom expert. Nonetheless, he believes he can assist the court in evaluating the merger of AT&T and Time Warner.

On Tuesday, he filed a pro se motion asking for leave to file an amicus brief in the case.

His submission is… how can I put it? Not good.

It's one of those documents that hurts your head to read. Lots of big words that don't make much sense when strung together, topped by a big dollop of conspiracy theory.

This is why pro se defendants get a bad name. They file stuff like this:

“The related diverse array of obstruction of justice abuses in violation of many Constitutional rights primarily stemmed from illicit activities undertaken by major participants in the U.S. telecommunications-media oligopoly and their illegal de facto joint venture marketing partners in the U.S. Government (“USG”) propaganda network. Based on preliminary accounts from these institutions and associated unfulfilled appeals by members of Congress, Dr. Page is believed to have been illicitly hacked in 2016.”

To the extent you can figure out what's going on, his prime grievance seems to be with Verizon and its subsidiary Yahoo for publishing what he says are false allegations (what he terms “perhaps the most dangerous, reckless, irresponsible and historically-instrumental moments in modern day sensational crime journalism”) that he met with two sanctioned Russian officials.

My colleague Cogan Schneier reports that Page is enrolled in a part-time L.L.M. program at a “prominent law school” and will begin coursework in January 2018.

Summer associate anyone?

|

Judge Not

You don't have to be a flaming liberal to conclude that Brett “I've-never-tried-a-case-before” Talley and Jeff “Transgender-kids-are-part-of-Satan's plan” Mateer have no business being federal judges.

Rather unexpectedly, Senator Chuck Grassley seems to have realized this as well. The Iowa Republican, who chairs the Senate Judiciary Committee, told CNN on Tuesday that he is urging President Donald Trump to reconsider the nominations.

“I would advise the White House not to proceed,” he said.

As far revelations go, it's a bit belated, considering Grassley on Nov. 9 voted to advance Talley's nomination to the full Senate. But hey, it's something.

Meanwhile, the Senate on Tuesday voted 50 to 48 to confirm Leonard Steven Grasz to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eight Circuit, despite his “not qualified” rating from the American Bar Association.

Deep sigh.

University of Arkansas School of Law professor Cynthia Nance did the ABA's first Grasz investigation, conducting 183 (!) confidential interviews. F enwick & West commercial litigation head Laurence Pulgram , a former chair of the ABA's litigation section, did a follow-up evaluation, interviewing another 24 lawyers and judges associated with Grasz.

Their findings: Gratz is reported to be “gratuitously rude” and his “passionately-held social agenda appeared to overwhelm and obscure the ability to exercise dispassionate and unbiased judgment.”

And what did the Senate do with this thorough, meticulous research by two esteemed lawyers?

It gave Gratz a lifetime appointment to the bench.

|

Glass Houses, Trump Edition

Donald Trump likes to tweet about people “begging” him for favors.

He did it on Tuesday, claiming New York Senator Kirsten Gillibrand “would come to my office 'begging' for campaign contributions not so long ago (and would do anything for them).”

Er, excuse me?

He also did it to political strategist Cheryl Jacobus, who in 2015 turned down an offer to work on the Trump campaign. In early 2016, she criticized Trump on CNN, opining that he “comes off like a third grader faking his way through an oral report on current affairs.”

In response, Trump tweeted that she “begged us for a job. We said no and she went hostile.” He also called Jacobus “a real dummy” (which for the record is exactly what a third grader would say) and followed up with, “Major loser, zero credibility.”

Jacobus sued Trump for defamation in New York state court. On Tuesday, she lost her appeal when the appellate division upheld the trial court's decision in January to dismiss the case.

She was represented by Jay Butterman of Buttermann & Kahn.

“The alleged defamatory statements are too vague, subjective, and lacking in precise meaning (i.e., unable to be proven true or false) to be actionable,” the appellate decision stated.

Trump was represented by Lawrence Rosen and Patrick McPartland of Larocca Hornik Rosen Greenberg & Blaha, who argued that the tweets were “pure opinion.”

Which as a defense, is a bit ironic from a guy who says he wants to loosen libel laws so he can sue people for writing things that are “purposely negative and horrible.”

Like a tweet calling someone a dummy?

|

More Legal News

9th Circuit Strikes Constitutional Challenge to the Arbitration Act
Arbitration champion Andrew Pincus of Mayer Brown scores again, this time on behalf of AT&T.

How Jones Day Cornered the Market on SCOTUS Clerks
A fair estimate would place the cost of recruiting the clerks at more than $10 million—not counting their salaries—over the last five years.

Lessons From Long-Shot SCOTUS Clerks: Work Hard, Stand Out, Stay Grounded
More fromLaw.com's SCOTUS series—the stories of four unlikely clerks.

Iran Sanctions-Busting Case May Test Limits of US Jurisdiction
When can the U.S. government criminally prosecute conduct by a foreign person that occurred outside the United States?

Shakespeare Mock Trial Brings Comedic Relief for Judges and Lawyers
Valuable precedent for cases involving people who accidentally marry shipwreck survivors after mistaking them for the person they love, except it's actually the shipwreck survivor's twin sister in disguise.

2017: The Year of Inconsistent FCPA Enforcement
A year marked by inconsistency in how monitorships were applied, recidivist companies were treated and what cases prompted both civil and criminal penalties.

Court's Expert Recommends Limit on Attorney Fees for NFL Settlement Lawyers
The size of the $112.5 million fee request undercuts the argument that counsel needs to be paid additional money.

SDNY Chief Judge Colleen McMahon Takes on Sexual Harassment
“It is a very good thing that the workplace's dirty little secret has finally been subjected to a healthy dose of Justice Louis Brandeis' strongest disinfectant.”