Lawyers, that is…
NZ Bear points out that the story of Benjamin Ginsberg, a lawyer for President Bush’s re-election campaign who disclosed Tuesday that he has been providing legal advice for a Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, is missing a similarly deep examination of the Kerry campaign.
From the ABC News article, it’s seems somewhat obvious that the DNC knows that they are equally as guilty of the legal cross pollenization.
Joe Sandler, a lawyer for the DNC and a group running anti-Bush ads, MoveOn.org, said there is nothing wrong with serving in both roles at once.
In addition to the FEC’s coordination rules, attorneys are ethically bound to maintain attorney-client confidentiality, Sandler said. They could lose their law license if they violate that, he said.Bear adds DNC and MoveOn.org lawyer Neil Reiff to the list. That makes 2 for Kerry’s side and 1 for Bush’s side, though neither situation is illegal or especially impropitious.
Of course the Kerry campaign spokesman (Chad Clanton) hasn’t gotten the note that his own side has similar issues. Of the Ginsberg’s admission he said, “It’s another piece of the mounting evidence of the ties between the Bush campaign and this group.”
Update: Benjamin Ginsberg has resigned from the Bush campaign. If the history of this campaign is any guide Sandler and Reiff’s relevance to the story (similar circumstances) will be totally ignored.
Make it 3 for Kerry and 1 for Bush.
Kevin —
You’re right. When analyzing this issue, people should think about these questions:
1) How many lawyers are there in the country?
2) How many of these lawyers practice campaign-finance law?
3) How many of these campaign-finance lawyers are good enough to qualify for the best jobs in the field?
4) If you’re conservative, how many of those top-flight campaign-finance lawyers are going to be recommended by your conservative friends? If you’re liberal, how many of those liberal lawyers would be recommended by your liberal friends?
Once you narrow down the population with Question No. 4, you’re looking at a very, very small group of lawyers.
–|PW|–
So why is the headline that Bush’s lawyer quit? Why shouldn;t it be that Kerry’s lawyers didn’t? I mean, if cross-representation is a Bad Thing, isn’t it bigger news that Kerry’s people continue to do the Bad Thing?