Posts Tagged ‘politics’

“Cox: Fieger tried to blackmail me about affair”

Further fireworks from the frequently fascinating Fieger files:

Michigan Attorney General Mike Cox accused a potential 2006 political opponent, high profile Oakland County lawyer Geoffrey Fieger, of blackmail Wednesday, claiming that Fieger threatened to reveal his extramarital affair if Cox did not drop an investigation into the lawyer’s alleged campaign finance violations.

(Dawson Bell and L.L. Brasier, Detroit Free Press, Nov. 9). For more on Fieger, whose activities have long been a mainstay of this site, see Mar. 13, Oct. 24, and many others.

More on the story: David Shepardson and Mike Martindale, “Sex scandal”, Detroit News, Nov. 10 (check sidebar for over-the-top statement by Fieger); L.L. Brasier and Patricia Montemurri, “Figure in Fieger-Cox sex scandal has criminal past”, Detroit Free Press, Nov. 10); Dawson Bell and L.L. Brasier, “Cox: Fieger made threat over affair”, Detroit Free Press, Nov. 10 (“one of the most bizarre events in recent Michigan political history”):

Fieger has a long history of stirring up trouble, both for himself and others, and sometimes on a personal level.

In 1998, when he was the Democratic nominee for governor, he suggested that his opponent — then-Gov. John Engler — was not the father of triplet daughters born to his wife, Michelle, in 1994.

Balloting results

In Washington state, voters defeated I-330, a doctor-backed plan to limit medical malpractice awards and lawyers’ fees, by about a 54-46 margin, while also drubbing I-336. a lawyer-backed alternative (Seattle P-I, Seattle Times). California voters trounced, by a 61-39 margin, Proposition 79, which would have regulated drug prices via freelance lawsuits among other means; they defeated Proposition 78, a drug-industry-backed alternative, by nearly as wide a margin. (L.A. Times, Sacramento Bee). In Virginia, former Richmond mayor and Democrat Tim Kaine, who had been criticized by the American Justice Partnership (Nov. 2), won the governorship anyway (Wash. Post). Texas voters easily passed an anti-gay-marriage constitutional amendment that Houston attorney Warren Cole, chairman of the State Bar of Texas’ family law section, called “horribly drafted” and which would prohibit the recognition of any “legal status” that is “similar to marriage” (more from Cathy Young)(see yesterday’s post) (Dallas Morning News) (cross-posted at Point of Law).

Online Freedom of Speech Act

The “Online Freedom of Speech Act”, H.R. 1606, which will exempt the Internet from McCain-Feingold (as was the case in the 2004 election), is being considered by Congress today. If Democrats continue to oppose it, the FEC will pass court-ordered regulation that could affect the ability of websites like this one to use the authors’ First Amendment rights to legally comment on federal elections, which in turn could set a precedent for state regulation. It’s fascinating to watch Daily Kos folk tie themselves in knots over the inevitable repercussions of the evisceration of the First Amendment in McCain-Feingold and McConnell v. FEC while simultaneously trying to hold the idea that this sort of campaign finance regulation is a good thing. But it’s also important that some roadblocks be placed in the way of the slippery slope. If this isn’t persuasive, then consider the fact that the New York Times opposes the legislation. Call your Congressperson. (Rep. Hensarling Redstate post.)

Next week’s balloting

Looking forward to next Tuesday’s election:

* The American Justice Partnership is blasting Virginia Democratic gubernatorial candidate Tim Kaine, noting that while a practicing trial lawyer he was sanctioned by a court for filing a suit deemed meritless and that while mayor of Richmond he asked staffers to look into the possibility of having the city sue gun manufacturers. For an account of the 1989 suit, see AP coverage, Jan. 10, and this Commonwealth Conservative post, the comments section of which indicates the Kaine campaign’s response. The Kaine campaign’s response on the gun-suit issue is here.

* * In California, campaigning continues on Proposition 79 (see Oct. 26), which would among other provisions empower anyone to sue pharmaceutical companies for the vaguely defined offense of “profiteering”. (William Finn Bennett, “Libertarians blast both prescription drug initiatives”, North County Times, Oct. 29). The Civil Justice Association of California strongly opposes the measure, as should we all.

* Washington state doctors and lawyers continue to battle down to the wire on legal-fee limits (see Ted Frank, PoL, Sept. 12) and now the lawyers appear to have thrown in the towel on their counter-initiative so as to devote all resources to defeating the doctor-backed I-330. (Ralph Thomas, “Doctors, lawyers toss mud to tout message”, Seattle Times, Oct. 10; Seattle Times, “Lawyers’ new goal: Defeat I-330”, Oct. 31) (via KevinMD). Pro-I-330 forces have put up a website whose contents, like its name, are rather rude: TheirLipsAreMoving.com (if you need the reference to the old lawyer joke explained, visit the site). And Arizona doctors are studying the Washington initiative with an eye to possibly launching one of their own, despite trial lawyers’ threats of a revenge-initiative if they do (Phil Riske, “Doctors, lawyers still might square off on the ballot”, Arizona Capitol Times, Oct. 31).

Geoffrey Fieger update

You will recall that Geoffrey Fieger’s modus operandi is to engage in outrageous behavior to get judges thrown off of cases and otherwise accuse judges who rule against him or his clients of misconduct (Nov. 20; Mar. 24). Now, in the aftermath of Hollins v. Jordan (Nov. 20 and links therein), Fieger is attacking an Ohio probate court judge who is daring to try to protect the settlement of the brain-damaged and legally incompetent plaintiff from Fieger’s machinations.

“This is all about intimidation,” [Judge] Corrigan said. He accused the plaintiffs’ out-of-town lawyers of “forum-shopping” to take the case away from him and give it to a Michigan judge more acquiescent to their wishes.

(James F. McCarty, “$30 million verdict spawns new legal battle”, Cleveland Plain-Dealer, Oct. 9). This dispute is over a $1.5 million pretrial settlement with another defendant; the $30 million verdict is also on appeal.

Back in Michigan, Fieger is offering to spend millions of dollars of his own money to run for Michigan Attorney General on the Democratic ticket. (Steven Harmon, “Fieger ready to pour own cash into attorney general fight”, Grand Rapids Press, Oct. 21). Fortunately for the Democratic Party, there doesn’t seem to be a lot of support for the idea. (Kathleen Gray, “Fieger considers running for state attorney general”, Detroit Free Press, Oct. 12). John Engler easily beat Fieger, 62 percent to 38 percent, when Fieger ran for governor in 1998.

The targeting of the incumbent attorney general, Mike Cox, may be related to “an ongoing criminal investigation of a complaint from Secretary of State Terri Lynn Land about alleged filing irregularities on $400,000 of Fieger-financed spending opposing the successful 2004 re-election of Republican Michigan Supreme Court Justice Stephen Markman.” (George Weeks, “Fieger isn’t faking bid for attorney general”, Detroit News, Oct. 13). Fieger has demonstrated his misunderstanding of principles of federal jurisdiction with a federal lawsuit against Cox and Land in an attempt to squelch the campaign finance investigation. (AP, Oct. 13).

PFAW vs. John Roberts

A People for the American Way report attacking the Supreme Court nominee is “something of a bore”, “lacks any nuance that would make it credible”, “scattershot”, a “less than compelling document” based on “utter dogmatism”, opines Richard Epstein. Ah, but don’t underestimate the group’s powers to stir up media trouble for Roberts, replies Stephen Presser as the two continue their featured discussion of the Supreme Court vacancy at Point of Law.