U.S. Judge Bill Pryor hires a law clerk who has expressed a hatred for black people, and then refuses to discuss his reasons for making such a dubious move

Bill Pryor

Federal judge Bill Pryor, once considered a prime candidate to be nominated to the U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS), has hired a law clerk who has expressed a hatred for black people. The story originated with the widely read blog Above the Law, and al.com columnist Kyle Whitmire deserves props for breaking it on Pryor's home turf in Alabama. Writes Whitmire, under the headline "What have you done, Bill Pryor?"

When I called the former Alabama Attorney General, now the chief judge on the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, he made it quickly clear he wouldn’t have anything to say on the record about his new law clerk.

That’s a shame. Because he needs to explain.

Last week, the legal blog Above the Law first reported Pryor’s new hire. The headline did most of the talking. “Law School Student Famous For Saying ‘I HATE BLACK PEOPLE’ Now Has Prestigious Federal Clerkship.”

It is a shame that Pryor does not feel the need to answer questions about such a hire, but that has been his standard reaction when faced with news coverage that likely makes him uncomfortable. That was his tactic when Legal Schnauzer exposed his ties to 1990s gay pornography at badpuppy.com. On that occasion, Pryor at least trotted out a former law clerk to issue a statement on his behalf. This time, he is in full lockdown mode, perhaps because he knows this is an even bigger embarrassment for federal courts than the gay-porn story -- absolutely calling into question whether his judgment is suitable for a spot on the federal bench.

Perhaps this latest episode should not be a surprise, given that Pryor is an acolyte of former U.S. Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL), who was denied a federal judgeship because of alleged racist statements from his past. How bad does this look for the 11th Circuit, and the three states (Alabama, Georgia, and Florida) it covers? It looks dreadful, even for a court with a history of issuing rulings that run contrary to governing law, including its own, and SCOTUS, precedent. Why does Pryor's latest gaffe matter -- a lot? Kyle Whitmire does a nice job of explaining:

For starters, the new clerk in question isn’t just some law school student. Her name is Crystal Clanton, and she used to be the national field director for Turning Point USA, a controversial activist group for conservative youth, led by Charlie Kirk.

Four years ago, New Yorker staff writer Jane Mayer looked at how Turning Point was having problems with racial bias within its ranks. It was in that story that Mayer reported the text message that made Clanton famous, from screenshots provided to her by a source.

“i hate black people. Like fuck them all ... I hate blacks. End of story,” Mayer reported one of the texts saying.

Clanton told Mayer she didn’t remember the text message and that it didn’t reflect who she was.

Kirk said the situation had been dealt with after he had become aware of it.

“Turning Point assessed the situation and took decisive action within 72 hours of being made aware of the issue,” said Kirk, the Turning Point leader who has since come under attack for calling George Floyd a “scumbag.”

What that decisive action had been Kirk, didn’t say, but Clanton left Turning Point at the same time.

Not long after her departure from Turning Point, Clanton went to work for Ginni Thomas, wife of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. It was a friendship and connection that began before she left Turning Point, and former Turning Point employees complained to Mayer that it created conflicts for the organization.

In other words, racism creates problems for those on the right. Now, Bill Pryor has allowed this ugly story to get even uglier. And Pryor is not the story's only tie to Alabama. Writes Whitmire:

Since then, Clanton has attended the Antonin Scalia School of Law at George Mason University. She will then clerk in Birmingham for U.S. District Judge Corey Maze, a Trump appointee previously hired by Pryor in the Alabama Attorney General’s office. After that she will clerk for Pryor.

Here’s the thing. I don’t especially believe in cancel culture, especially for the young. It’s entirely possible that someone weaponized Clanton’s worst moment against her to even a score. Maybe she’s changed. Maybe she’s learned. Maybe her talents are so tremendous they outshine a youthful mistake. All that’s possible, and I told Judge Pryor to give her my number since I didn’t have hers. I’d like to hear her story.

But this isn’t about Clanton. This is about Judge Pryor.

And it’s about the system he and Clanton inhabit.

In short, Pryor and Maze have opened a cornucopia of career opportunities for a young woman who has expressed hatred for a significant chunk of the U.S. population. And that is particularly troubling when you consider a major portion of cases heard in federal courts involve civil rights, such as claims of employment discrimination and police misconduct -- both of which often involve black people as victims. As a law clerk, Clanton will not be a mere bystander, as Whitmire notes:

Clerkships for federal judges aren’t coffee-fetching internships for resume padding. They are launchpads for legal careers — shortcuts into ivory tower law firms, stepping stones that can lead to the bench itself one day.

It’s a gateway. Pryor is a gatekeeper. And when you let one person through that gate, you inevitably leave someone else locked on the outside. There are thousands of well-qualified candidates for a job like that every year.

And Pryor picked the one with at least one documented instance of saying racist stuff.

The story here isn’t about what Clanton did or didn’t say in a text. It’s about what her hire says to all those folks left on the other side of the gate. That it’s all about who you know, not what you know. That knowing the right people or going to the right law school means more than what comes up when someone Googles your name.

Perhaps most important for an appellate court judge, it’s about who gets second chances.

As a name on every Republican president’s shortlist for the U.S. Supreme Court, Pryor needs to explain. Perhaps, one day, a U.S. Senator will ask him to answer these questions.

For now, his silence will have to speak for him.

Balch & Bingham law firm steps in doo-doo again, creating a foul-smelling mess that could lead rainmaking partner, and others, to race for the exits

 

A rainmaking partner at Birmingham's Balch & Bingham law firm, and perhaps others, might be looking to hit the exits in the wake of the firm's latest encounter with doo-doo, the kind that sticks relentlessly to the shoes and seems to create an everlasting stench, according to a report at banbalch.com. Writes Publisher K.B. Forbes, under the headline "Will Balch’s Three-Headed Partner and Others Jump Ship?"

Get this: Balch & Bingham partner Christian B. Waddell serves as counsel to three different Mississippi state-sanctioned entities and agencies and has been involved as underwriting counsel for almost $1 billion in bonds and notes. Waddell has procured millions in contracts and has been, regardless of the cronyism, a money-making success.

Now everything appears to be at risk because of his association to the alleged racist and embattled law firm Balch & Bingham, and the investigative report of The Washington Post.

The Post report, which surely drew national attention, comes on the heels of several other debacles at Balch. We thought it could not get worse than having a former attorney accused of child-sex charges. But an expose in The Washington Post? That could be worse, almost as bad as responding to a knock at the door, and hearing a deep male voice say, "I'm Mike Wallace, from 60 Minutes" (especially since Wallace has been dead for more than nine years). Writes Forbes:

From the Mississippi rental assistance debacle to the alleged elderly exploitation scandal, from the criminal arrest of an ex-Balch attorney for alleged child solicitation to the never-ending but abhorrent Newsome Conspiracy Case, Balch is at a crossroads.

And when did Balch’s walls begin to collapse?

The late Schuyler Allen Baker, Jr., a long-time partner and General Counsel at Balch, foolishly vowed to fight the Newsome Conspiracy Case to the death.

An innocent competitor minding his own business, Burt Newsome was targeted, wrongly arrested, and defamed in a conspiracy allegedly headed by an ex-Balch partner now selling mattresses.

Newsome has been fighting Balch vigorously, even exhausting all legal avenues before eventually proceeding with a federal RICO and Civil Rights lawsuit.

Some Balch partners reportedly are angry that the firm's leadership has allowed a bad situation to deteriorate to a level that can leave reputations in tatters:

Schuyler Allen Baker, Jr. died last year. He obviously never thought or dreamt that things would escalate and deteriorate as they sadly have.

Our understanding from outside sources is that some Balch partners, across Balch’s footprint, are furious that the firm continues to throw gasoline on a case that should have been settled years ago.

Even Waddell allegedly is not pleased with the unneeded publicity and scrutiny. Is he, like former Balch partner William Stiers ready to jump ship?

We wouldn’t be surprised if Waddell and others ended up at Butler Snow or another reputable law firm in the near future.

Who can blame them or all three-heads?

Could things get worse before they get better for Balch? As banbalch.com reported on Saturday, The Washington Post already has shined a white-hot spotlight on Balch's three-headed partner:

If there is any kind of “strong track record,” greasing the political wheels through long-time inside connections and keeping the contract process closed sounds more accurate.

As the Post points out:

Chris Waddell, a Balch attorney, already served as MHC’s counsel, and Balch had just wrapped up work on another MHC aid program at the end of 2020. The board voted unanimously in a Feb. 10 meeting to hire Balch to help create RAMP. “As such, there was no request for proposals,” Spivey [MHC’s Executive Director] wrote in an email to The Post.

Present at the housing corporation’s Feb. 10 board meeting, according to the minutes, were Balch partners Waddell and Lucien Smith. Smith is the former chief of staff to Gov. Phil Bryant (R), for whom Reeves served as lieutenant governor before being elected to succeed Bryant in 2019. Smith also served as chair of the state’s Republican Party until last September.

Shameful! The counsel of MHC, Chris Waddell, a Balch partner and well-connected Balch partner Lucien Smith are present at an MHC board meeting (obviously closed to the public) when Balch receives a no-bid $3.8 million contract from Waddell’s own client using federal funds.

So who is Waddell? Balch’s website states:

Chris Waddell focuses on affordable housing, economic development and public finance.  As counsel to Mississippi Home Corporation (the state’s housing finance agency), he has experience navigating both state and federal housing laws with particular expertise in Low Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTCs), and single and multi-family development finance. As counsel to the Mississippi Development Bank, he frequently works with local governments seeking access to capital markets. He also represents the Mississippi Business Finance Corporation, a public corporation created by statute to encourage economic and industrial development in the state.

Three counsel roles at three Mississippi state government-funded entities means Balch is indeed entrenched.

How many contracts has Balch received from these and other affiliated entities or agencies?

Investigators need to probe, audit, and hold the contractual cronies accountable.

Goverment-made millionaires should not abuse their advisory roles to fatten-up their own wallets with no-bid, behind closed-doors, million-dollar contracts.

Now that federal funds are involved, the Office of the Inspector General of the U.S. Department of the Treasury and those in charge of CARES Act funds need to take a deep, forensic look at Balch and their government and political cronies.

Study linking measles vaccine to autism long has been discredited, but it helps drive an anti-vaccine movement that can prove deadly in the age of COVID

Dr. Andrew Wakefield

 

America's anti-vaccination movement likely has its roots in the notion that the measles vaccine can cause autism -- and that myth grew from a long-debunked study, by a long-discredited scientist. But a significant chunk of Americans apparently still believe in the myth, and it causes them to resist COVID-19 vaccines that can be life-saving. From a report at Salon, under the headline "Millions of Americans view being anti-vaccination as a part of their social identity":

Pre-pandemic, the modern incarnation of the general anti-vaccination movement was spurred by a 1998 paper from the medical journal The Lancet which linked autism to the measles vaccine. That paper was later thoroughly discredited by scientists, denounced by The Lancet and retracted by 10 of its 12 co-authors. Its lead author, Andrew Wakefield, lost his medical license in the United Kingdom for ethical violations. Despite this, many parents would read pseudoscientific literature inspired by Wakefield's paper and conclude that it was dangerous to vaccinate their children.

That does not sound like a study worth following. But it has managed to worm itself into the fabric of American -- and in the shadow of COVID, such a myth can be deadly. How does this happen? Salon's Matthew Rozsa explains:

In a new paper published for the journal Politics, Groups, and Identities, researchers found that 22 percent of Americans actively identify themselves as anti-vaccination, with 14 percent saying they are "sometimes" part of the movement and 8 percent saying this is "always" the case. 

These self-described anti-vaxxers "embrace" the label of anti-vaxxer "as a form of social identity," the authors write.

"We also find that people who score highly on our [anti-vaxx social identification] measure tend to be less trusting of scientific experts and more individualistic," they noted. 

The study is a stark reminder that vaccine-hostile attitudes are not a fringe view, but are possessed by a substantial portion of the U.S . population, many of whom have come to consider the label a formative part of their identity. As daily COVID-19 vaccination rates have begun to decline, the cohort of self-identified anti-vaccination Americans are contributing to the delayed march towards herd immunity in the United States.

This can have a profound impact on public health -- and it comes with deeply planted roots in partisan politics:

Indeed, widespread refusal to get vaccinated is a major reason why experts doubt the number of Americans who vaccinate themselves from the deadly disease will reach 70 percent, the rough number needed to reach herd immunity. Currently, slightly more than 47 percent of Americans are vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2.

Texas A&M University School of Public Health assistant professor Timothy Callaghan said in a university press release that "the fact that 22 percent of Americans at least sometimes identify as anti-vaxxers was much higher than expected and demonstrates the scope of the challenge in vaccinating the population against COVID-19 and other vaccine-preventable diseases."

Callaghan's concern reflects a growing challenge for public health experts, who have now to contend with the myriad ways in which basic public health advice has become politicized. Indeed, a March 2021 study, which revealed the extent to which partisan politics have influenced attitudes towards vaccination, found that Republican men were the most likely to be COVID-19 anti-vaxxers (49 percent) — followed by Republican-identifying women (34 percent), Democratic women (14 percent) and Democratic men (6 percent). The same study revealed that 40 percent of white non-college educated men and 38 percent of white evangelicals — groups that both lean conservative — said they would refuse a coronavirus vaccine if it was offered to them.

It should be no surprise that the anti-vaxx movement tends to run hand in hand with support for Donald Trump: 

Another recent study also found that anti-vaccine ideas are most popular among Republicans. Despite the prevalence of anti-vaxxer views, researchers at the nonprofit Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH) found that up to 65% of anti-vaccine misinformation on major social media platforms are being spread by one of a mere dozen individuals and organizations, meaning that misinformation is concentrated in its dissemination.

All of this has some academics shaking their heads, especially considering that Andrew Wakefield's study regarding the measles vaccine and autism has little, if any, basis in fact:

In April, Dr. Kasisomayajula Viswanath, a professor of health communication at the Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health, spoke with Salon's Nicole Karlis about the complex nature of the anti-vaccine movement. Viswanath pointed out that there are many reasons why someone might distrust vaccines, not all of which are linked to partisan politics. Patients from underprivileged backgrounds, for instance, might have previously experienced racism in our health care system and feel an understandable wariness.

"That's very different from a group of people who are outright refusers who say, 'No, this is my freedom,'" Viswanath said. "Personal liberty is one of the biggest drivers."

Balch & Bingham's problematic administration of a fund to prevent COVID-related evictions in the Deep South draws heavy scrutiny from The Washington Post

"Pimps of Mississippi" (banbalch.com)

We wrote in July about the irony (or maybe the oddity) of Birmingham's Balch & Bingham law firm administering a $200-million COVID-19 relief fund, designed to help prevent pandemic-related evictions. That seemed ironic because Balch brags at its Web site about its ability to help landlords execute on evictions and to help lenders collect on debts. In other words, we wrote, "Balch specializes in the kind of law that Mississippians, under the stress of possibly losing their homes,  absolutely do NOT need.

Now we learn, via an article yesterday at The Washington Post, Balch's work on the project might be more than just ironic; it might be flat-out incompetent. From a post at banbalch.com, under the headline "BREAKING NEWS: Balch & Bingham Made Millions While Mississippi Renters Received Nothing": Writes Publisher K.B. Forbes:

The Pimps of Mississippi have made national headlines [yesterday] in The Washington Post. Embattled and alleged racist law law firm Balch & Bingham has reaped millions while renters, many of whom are People of Color, received nothing.

Is a federal or congressional probe next?

The Washington Post reports:

Across America, state distribution of federal cash meant to help people facing eviction during the pandemic has been uneven and slow. But Mississippi’s program has been one of the more problematic. More than seven months after Congress and former president Donald Trump created the Emergency Rental Assistance Program, Mississippi had spent only 11 percent of $186.7 million in first-round funding, according to the Treasury Department, compared with a national average of 32 percent.

Mississippians are clamoring for the funds: 9,000 people applied to the program in August, up nearly 130 percent from the entire period from March 29 to July 31, said Scott Spivey, executive director of the Mississippi Home Corporation (MHC), the state’s quasi-governmental housing agency charged with running the program.

But tenants and local advocates say it can take more than a month to get a response from the program, which is administered in part by Balch & Bingham, a politically connected Alabama law firm. Hired through a no-bid $3.8 million contract by MHC, Balch & Bingham plays a key role in reviewing and scrutinizing aid applications, a process critics say leads to enormous delays.

How bad does this look for Balch? Well, having The Washington Post write an investigative piece about your law firm is not likely to make an attorney's day. Writes Forbes: 

The investigative story rocks the embattled law firm appearing to show high payments for clerical work and what appears to be contradicting statements.  The Washington Post notes:

Balch and MHC agreed to a $3.8 million budget for the firm to help administer the program, including a charge of $135-per-hour for the review of 30,000 applications, according to a March letter from Balch to MHC. In addition to the review of applications, Balch’s role in the rental relief program was meant to include helping draft rules and regulations, “designing and overseeing program administration,” and training staff, according to the letter.

[Balch spokesperson Julie Wall] Khoury described the firm’s role differently, though. She said that nearly 100 Balch attorneys and staff have worked on the program, and that its role is “currently limited to compliance review of applications” and providing legal advice on state and federal guidelines. “Balch & Bingham does not manage the RAMP program, nor do we administer ERA funds,” Khoury said in an email.

Is Forbes buying Khoury's explanation? Not exactly:

Did she just insert a stinky foot into her mouth?

How absurd! Balch may not process the rental assistance disbursements, but, for heaven’s sake, reviewing and determining if the application is worthwhile or not has more to do with the delays than hitting the “send the money” button.

The Washington Post adds:

The flow of billions of federal pandemic relief dollars aimed at curbing economic pain across the country appears to have been particularly lucrative for [Balch & Bingham], as it secured several aid-related contracts over the past 18 months and ultimately scored more than $6 million in fees, according to state procurement records and contract documents provided by MHC. Balch has a line of business representing commercial landlords, according to its website, and a Post review of legal filings shows that Balch represented a lender pursuing foreclosure against a family as recently as 2020 — even as it helped administer a separate federally funded program aimed at preventing foreclosures.

The Pimps of Mississippi: a law firm that forecloses and represents apartment owners now involved in rental and foreclosure assistance.

         Stinks to high heaven!

Based on deposition testimony, key figure in the Burt Newsome conspiracy case visited a dentist for repairs because he had pulled a crown off his own tooth

 

A man who allegedly took threatening actions against Birmingham attorney Burt Newsome, leading to a criminal menacing charge against Newsome and a case that now is before the U.S. Supreme Court for possible review, was in the vicinity that day for a dental visit because -- wait for it -- he had pulled a crown off his own tooth.

Newsome alleged in a subsequent civil complaint that John F. Bullock's peculiar actions that day were part of a conspiracy, apparently hatched by former Balch & Bingham partner Clark Cooper, to steal a chunk of his banking practice. Bullock, who owns a variety store in Pell City, argued that he and other defendants did not know each other before Newsome filed a lawsuit against them. Newsome produced evidence suggesting the defendants were using burner phones to disguise their communications, but the Jefferson County trial court bought the "we didn't know each other" defense and granted summary judgment or dismissal to the defendants. The Alabama Supreme Court had information about Bullock's bizarre actions regarding his own tooth -- the material is in the public record, as part of Newsome's appellate documents -- but the state high court apparently ignored it, or did not see anything unusual about it, and upheld the trial court's ruling.

Bullock's actions raise at least two odd questions: (1) Why did he drive from Pell City to see a dentist who happens to share a parking area with Newsome's law practice, which is off Old U.S. 280 -- not far from where the Birmingham and Hoover city limits stretch into Shelby County?; (2) Why did Bullock need to see a dentist that day?

We don't have a clear answer to question No. 1, but the answer to question No. 2, in Bullock's own words, seems clear -- his "dental emergency" was of his own making.

Bullock's appearance in the parking lot came shortly after a Hoover man named Al Seier (now deceased) had parked in a similar fashion, allegedly threatened Newsome over his efforts to collect a debt that Seier's wife owed, and pulled a gun on the attorney, leading to a menacing charge against Seier.

Shaken by those events, Newsome made sure to have a gun available at his office. When he saw Bullock's vehicle parked in a manner similar to Seier's, Newsome became concerned. That concern grew as Newsome approached his car, only to have Bullock quickly open his door and block Newsome's path. The attorney pulled a .22 pistol from his pocket, held it by his side and asked Bullock to move so he could get in his car. Bullock did move, but he went on to file a menacing charge against Newsome.

Was that an act of retaliation for the charge Newsome had brought against Al Seier? Was it part of a scheme to set up Newsome for a criminal charge that could be used to draw banking clients away from his practice?  Clear answers to those questions remain elusive. But a deposition transcript filed with Newsome's appeal indicates Bullock was there to see Dr. Lora Gaxiola for a dental problem that he created. From sworn testimony in the Bullock deposition:

Q: And she (Dr. Gaxiola) is your personal dentist?

A. Correct.

Q. Was there a particular reason why you had an appointment set for that day?

A. I had to have a crown reset.

Q. How long had the crown been giving you problems before you set the appointment?

A. I pulled it off the weekend before when I was out of town.

Q. So it was less than seven days before you made your appointment?

A. Correct.

Q. Were you in pain as a result of that?

A. No.

Q. Were you in discomfort?

A. Huh-uh.

Q. Was that a no?

A. Was that a no?

Q. Yes.

MR. HILL (Bullock's attorney): John, you're going to have to answer yes or no.

THE WITNESS: Okay.

A. No.

  From Dr. Gaxiola's deposition about issues related to Bullock's visit:

 Q. What kind of incident can cause [a crown] to come off? Can a person have it removed with [his] own hand . . . or are there certain foods that they shouldn't eat that will dislodge it, like an apple or things like that?

A. Nothing should make a crown come off.

Q. Okay.

A. When we put them in, we don't tell them -- we don't restrict what kind of eating or anything that they can do. Normally, that's what we tell people.

Q. And I think you have already answered the question, but just to be clear, you don't give any kind of restrictions in terms of what you do ordinarily with any other thing in terms of any activity?

A. Correct, no restrictions.

Q. None at all. Okay.

Epic hack of Epik website-hosting firm provides roughly 10 years of data about the rise of right-wing extremism that led to January 6 attack on U.S. Capitol

(Associated Press)

 

The story of perhaps the most important data breach in U.S. history has erupted over roughly the past two weeks. The tale is in its infancy, so it's too early to say in what direction it might head. But it clearly could provide revelations about Alabama's toxic political and legal culture -- mainly because Montgomery-connected extremist Ali (Akbar) Alexander appears to be a central character. Here are at least three questions the breach could help answer:

(1) Who was behind the Jan. 6 assault on the U.S. Capitol by apparent supporters of outgoing President Donald Trump?

(2) Who is behind right-wing corruption in Alabama, and beyond, and what forms does it take?

(3) How did one of our two major political parties turn into a haven for those wracked by disinformation, race-based fears and hatred, and disrespect for the rule of law -- becoming essentially a cult of personality, with few (if any) defining governing principles beyond maintaining power, at all costs?  

What is the gist of the story? Here is an explainer from CNN: 

The hacking collective Anonymous last week claimed to have stolen and leaked reams of data held by Epik, a website hosting firm popular with far-right organizations like the Proud Boys.

The more than 150 gigabytes of data swept up in the breach shine a light on years of online activities from far-right groups, including those who tried to overturn the 2020 presidential election. While researchers are still sifting through the data, Epik has historically provided web hosting services to an array of conspiracy theorists, and for conservative media networks like Parler and Gab. 

The breach also undercuts Epik's pledge to customers that it can safeguard their anonymity, no matter what dangerous conspiracy theories they spread online. For that reason, experts told CNN the hack could have repercussions for how far-right groups organize and try to protect themselves online.

"A breach like this will force some of these actors to find security providers outside of North America to possibly step up their security game," Gabriella Coleman, a professor of anthropology at Harvard University, told CNN. Coleman said the data dump "confirmed a lot of the details of the far-right ecosystem."

Emily Crose, a cybersecurity analyst who studies online extremism, said the breach "will be another factor causing paranoia among far-right communities online." Crose said those groups already feel like they're under surveillance, given their violent attempts to overturn the 2020 presidential election. 

Emma Best, co-founder of Distributed Denial of Secrets, a non-profit that itself has published hacktivist data, said researchers could be poring over the Epik leaks for months for clues into how different people and far-right organizations are linked.

 

The breach was first reported by freelance journalist Steven Monacelli.

How epic was the Epik hack? Reports CNN:

In a statement to CNN on Tuesday night, Epik said the information that Anonymous released included data on 15 million people that was already public.

 

Epik has been a trusted resource for many years and our highest priority will always be security and privacy," the firm said.

A report at The Wasington Post/Seattle Times provides insight on the scope of the hack, calling it "huge":

Extremism researchers and political opponents have treated the leak as a Rosetta Stone to the far right, helping them to decode who has been doing what with whom over several years. Initial revelations have spilled out steadily across Twitter since news of the hack broke last week, often under the hashtag #epikfail, but those studying the material say they will need months and perhaps years to dig through all of it.

“It’s massive. It may be the biggest domain-style leak I’ve seen and, as an extremism researcher, it’s certainly the most interesting,” said Megan Squire, a computer science professor at Elon University who studies right-wing extremism. “It’s an embarrassment of riches — stress on the embarrassment.”

Epik, based in the Seattle suburb of Sammamish, has made its name in the internet world by providing critical web services to sites that have run afoul of other companies’ policies against hate speech, misinformation and advocating violence. Its client list is a roll-call of sites known for permitting extreme posts and that have been rejected by other companies for their failure to moderate what their users post.

Online records show those sites have included 8chan, which was dropped by its providers after hosting the manifesto of a gunman who killed 51 Muslims in Christchurch, New Zealand, in 2019; Gab, which was dropped for hosting the anti-Semitic rants of a gunman who killed 11 in a Pittsburgh synagogue in 2018; and Parler, which was dropped by Amazon Web Services due to lax moderation related to the Jan. 6 Capitol attack.

Epik also provides services to a network of sites devoted to extremist QAnon conspiracy theories. Epik briefly hosted the neo-Nazi site Daily Stormer in 2019 after acquiring a cybersecurity company that had provided it with hosting services, but Epik soon canceled that contract, according to news reports. Epik also stopped supporting 8chan after a short period of time, the company has said.

The hack produced roughly 10 years' worth of data about the far right, according to a report at Business Insider.

Epik oficials have said they take data security seriously, but that claim now appears to have been mostly window dressing. From the WaPo/Seattle Times article: 

Since the hack, Epik’s security protocols have been the target of ridicule among researchers, who’ve marveled at the site’s apparent failure to take basic security precautions such as routine encryption that could have protected data about its customers from becoming public.

The files include years of website purchase records, internal company emails and customer account credentials revealing who administers some of the biggest far-right websites. The data includes client names, home addresses, email addresses, phone numbers and passwords left in plain, readable text. The hack even exposed the personal records from Anonymize, a privacy service Epik offered to customers wanting to conceal their identity.

Similar failings by other hacked companies have drawn scrutiny from the Federal Trade Commission, which has probed companies such as dating site Ashley Madison for failing to protect their customers’ private data from hackers. FTC investigations have resulted in settlements imposing financial penalties and more rigorous privacy standards.

Where does Ali Alexander, with his Montgomery-based attorney Baron Coleman, fit into this picture? We will have more on that in an upcoming post. 

(To be continued)

The legal world is feeling heat from forest fires sparked by unsavory behavior that would fit right in with Alabama's toxic culture marked by Balch & Bingham

The legal profession tends to avoid serious public scrutiny, but that might be changing, according to a report at banbalch.com. In what should be a surprise to no one, the dubious actions are reminiscent of Alabama's toxic legal/political environment. Writes Publisher K.B. Forbes, in a post titled "Not Above the Law! Balch & Bingham, Perkins Coie, and Arnold & Porter Feel the Blistering Heat":

In 2017, we, the CDLU, dispatched a letter and email to the firm-wide managing partner of Perkins Coie, the law firm that represented the failed presidential campaign of former U.S. Senator and First Lady Hillary Clinton. 

The law firm, closely tied to the Democratic Party, was allegedly behind the circulation of the infamous and unsubstantiated “Steele Dossier” against President Donald J. Trump.

We wrote at the time:

We are writing to you to request an immediate internal investigation of the allegations against Perkins Coie partner Marc E. Elias who allegedly mislead the media and the public about the funding of Fusion GPS. Recent revelations are bothersome. If the allegations are substantiated, Perkins Coie must investigate what other staff or partners were involved in this alleged public deception and hold them accountable. 

Since last year, we have been investigating a sector that has never been under real, tangible scrutiny: the legal profession. We have learned that many unscrupulous and possibly criminal actions, including money laundering and wire fraud, are hidden behind the attorney-client privilege.

                   Like Balch & Bingham, Perkins Coie ignored our request.

The story, however does not end there for Perkins Coie. Writes Forbes: 

Like Balch & Bingham, a criminal indictment was handed down against an esteemed partner at Perkins Coie.

Last Thursday, a federal grand jury in Washington, D.C. indicted Perkins Coie attorney Michael Sussman on a charge of lying to the FBI in 2016 when he allegedly hid the fact that he was working for the Hillary Clinton campaign while pushing for an investigation into supposed ties between the Trump Organization and Alfa Bank, a Russian financial institution.

On Friday, unlike Balch & Bingham’s partner, Sussman resigned from the law firm.

That's not the only trouble percolating in the legal world. Another storm is brewing over opioid-related litigation, which has involved Alabama Republican and Jeff Sessions/Balch & Bingham ally Luther Strange. From banbalch.com:

The indictment comes around the time of more legal bad news out of New York.

There is a “flash flood of misconduct inquiries in opioid litigation across the country” that is “threatening to inflict considerable damage on the professional reputations of its Arnold & Porter attorneys,” according to a report last week from Law360.

New York “Supreme Court Justice Jerry Garguilo … ordered Endo Pharmaceuticals and its attorneys, Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer, to explain at a hearing…why they withheld critical evidence from the New York Attorney General, ” according to Paul Napoli Law Blog.

Lying, withholding evidence, and other unscrupulous conduct is not surprising after four years of observing Balch & Bingham’s alleged misconduct.

Now, Balch is stung by the alleged cover-up of misconduct by alleged pedophile Chase T. Espy, an attorney who worked for Balch for eight years and was arrested in August after allegedly seeking sex with a child online.

Balch foolishly admitted to having abruptly fired Espy a year ago, last September. Weeks before firing the alleged predator who solicited a child online, Balch changed their internal Wi-Fi address, according to sources at Balch.

What was Balch hiding and what will investigators find?

Although Marc Elias eventually left Perkins Coie and started his own law firm, he still collaborates with his former employer and represents the Democratic Party in legal battles.

The alleged unsavory conduct does not end.

In March, the “United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ordered sanctions against Marc Elias and other attorneys at Perkins Coie, an international law firm that provides counsel for the Democratic National Committee, for submitting redundant and misleading supplemental filings in their attempt to re-implement straight-ticket voting in Texas,” according to a statement from the Attorney General of Texas.

Some partners at Balch, Perkins Coie, and Arnold & Porter may foolishly believe they are above the law.

Like the blind and adoring fans of Alabama Power CEO and ex-Balch partner Mark A. Crosswhite, some of the partners may stupidly believe that they, too, are “the most powerful” person in their respective state or practice area.

Go ask Balch’s ex-partner Joel I. Gilbert when he’s ten feet tall.

He’ll be reporting to federal prison in five weeks.

Signs of sloppiness at Christopher Wray's FBI go beyond the USA Gymnastics probe; they date at least to a botched background check on Brett Kavanaugh

Brett Kavanaugh protest

Signs of ineptitude and possible corruption at the FBI under Director Christopher Wray did not begin with the botched USA Gymnastics probe, which was the subject of a U.S. Senate hearing last week. It dates at least to a sloppy background check on U.S. Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh -- and that's a story that seemingly will not go away. Perhaps it's driven in part by Wray's curious background, which  includes alarming ties to Russian interests and right-wing bad actors who tend to have an outsized influence in Alabama's political and legal worlds. From a Legal Schnauzer post in October 2018:

FBI director Christopher Wray has professional ties to Russia, and that likely explains a Brett Kavanaugh background check that widely is being described as a "sham," according to an Alabama political insider.

Donald Trump nominated Wray to lead the FBI in June 2017, having fired James Comey roughly one month earlier. In 2003, President George W. Bush nominated Wray to lead the Criminal Division at the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ). Before going into public service, Wray was a partner at King and Spalding, an Atlanta-based law firm with 10 offices around the country -- plus 10 international branches, including one in Moscow. . . . 

How sketchy was the FBI supplemental background check on Kavanaugh? It probably would have to improve to merit being called "cursory". According to one report, FBI agents interviewed nine individuals --  but they apparently did not include chief accuser, Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, nor any of her corroborating witnesses. From a report at New York magazine:

Several people who reached out to investigators to offer information said they were also left hanging. NBC News says dozens of potential witnesses have come forward to FBI field offices, “but agents have not been permitted to talk to many of them.” The New Yorker spoke to several people who were also unable to get an audience with the FBI despite their ability to corroborate [Deborah] Ramirez’s story and information refuting claims Kavanaugh made during last week’s testimony.

The FBI/Kavanaugh story continues to percolate, as evidenced by a report last week from the UK Guardian: 

The FBI director, Chris Wray, is facing new scrutiny of the bureau’s handling of its 2018 background investigation of Brett Kavanaugh, including its claim that the FBI lacked the authority to conduct a further investigation into the then supreme court nominee.

At the heart of the new questions surrounding Wray . . . is a 2010 Memorandum of Understanding that the FBI has recently said constrained the agency’s ability to conduct any further investigations of allegations of misconduct.

It is not clear whether that claim is accurate, based on a close reading of the MOU, which was released in court records following a Freedom of Information Act request.

The FBI was called to investigate allegations of sexual misconduct against Kavanaugh during his Senate confirmation process in 2018, after he was accused of assault by Christine Blasey Ford, a professor who knew Kavanaugh when they were both in high school. He also faced other accusations, including that he had exposed himself to a classmate at Yale called Deborah Ramirez. Kavanaugh denied both accusations.

The FBI closed its extended background check of Kavanaugh after four days and did not interview either Blasey Ford or Kavanaugh. The FBI also disclosed to the Senate this June – two years after questions were initially asked – that it had received 4,500 tips from the public during the background check and that it had shared all “relevant tips” with the White House counsel at that time. It is not clear whether those tips were ever investigated.

The FBI said in its letter to two senators – Sheldon Whitehouse and Christopher Coons – that the FBI did not have the authority under the 2010 MOU at the time to “unilaterally conduct further investigative activity absent instructions from the requesting entity”. In other words, the FBI has said it would have required explicit instructions from the Trump White House to conduct further investigation under the existing 2010 guidelines on how such investigations ought to be conducted.

But an examination by the Guardian of the 2010 MOU, which was signed by the then attorney general, Eric Holder, and then White House counsel, Robert Bauer, does not make explicitly clear that the FBI was restricted in terms of how it would conduct its investigation.

The MOU, which was released in court documents in 2019 as part of Freedom of Information Act litigation brought against the US government by Buzzfeed, also does not explicitly state that the White House had the power to set the process parameters on any investigation.

What about the ties of Wray's former law firm to Russian mobsters, domestic mobsters, and unsavory characters in the Alabama political/legal firmament? From our 2018 post:

King and Spalding's extensive ties to Russia should raise eyebrows about the cursory supplemental background check of Brett Kavanaugh by Christopher Wray's FBI, says Jill Simpson -- whistle blower, opposition researcher, and retired lawyer from Rainsville, Alabama. In a Facebook post yesterday, Simpson notes King and Spalding's ties to a number of dubious characters and activities related to Russia.

They include Sergei Millian, a one-time Russian translator who has headed the Russian-American Chamber of Commerce (Russia Am Cham, based in Atlanta) and reportedly was a primary source of information for the Trump-Steele dossier. In short, Millian likely has loads of blackmail-worthy dirt on Trump, and guess what law firm has represented Russia Am Cham? It's King and Spalding, of course, says Simpson.

The firm also has ties to Trump-affiliated mobster Felix Sater, and Simpson says the firm (via Russia Am Cham) was involved in a failed lottery deal -- involving oily Alabama lawyer Rob Riley and his associate, Robert Sigler -- that fleeced the late Milton McGregor, attorney Tommy Gallion, and other prominent Montgomery business types out of about $40 million. King and Spalding, says Simpson, has ties to Russian oligarch/mafia figure Oleg Derispaska, one-time Trump campaign chair and convicted felon Paul Manafort, and Trump attorney general Jeff Sessions.

That is a lot ugly, nasty stuff -- threatening America's democracy, and Christopher Wray, via his association with King and Spalding, is tied to all of it. Writes Simpson:

FBI director Christopher Wray should be forced to resign over [the Kavanaugh supplemental background check]. It was Wray's firm, King and Spalding, that used to host the Russia Am Cham conferences for Oleg Deripaska, Mr Millian, and Mr. Sater --  the Riley/Sessions Gang attended when they beat Milton McGregor and his buddies out of $40 million for a fake Russian lottery. 

Wray's firm represents the Russian Oil and Gas Business firm that Vladimir Putin directs. Also, Christopher Wray was a Yale Law School graduate, just like Kavanaugh,  and has been buddies with the Kavanaugh, Rove, and Sessions crowd for years. 

The FBI's Kavanaugh background check is just a report done by a member of the Jeff Sessions, Mitch McConnell, Donald Trump Russian Mafia. I tried to say last week it would be bullshit, due to Wray's ties to the Russian Mafia. His old firm is a big part of Putin's legal team. Until we as a country crush the New York/Alabama/GOP Russian Mafia, we are going to continue seeing this level of corruption.

Former deputy faces manslaughter charge for the fatal shooting of white teenager in rural Arkansas, in a case drawing attention from prominent civil-rights lawyers

A protest in Arkansas for Hunter Brittain

An Arkansas deputy has been charged with manslaughter in the fatal June shooting of a white teenager near Little Rock. The incident attracted the attention of national civil-rights leaders and is seen by some as a potentially pivotal event in the drive to reform U.S. policing. From a report at Associated Press:

A special prosecutor announced the felony charge against Michael Davis, a former sergeant with the Lonoke County Sheriff’s Office, in the fatal shooting of 17-year-old Hunter Brittain. Davis faces between three and 10 years in prison if convicted.

Davis shot Brittain during a June 23 traffic stop outside an auto repair shop along Arkansas Highway 89 south of Cabot, a city of about 26,000 people roughly 30 miles northeast of Little Rock.

Davis told investigators he shot Brittain once in the neck during the traffic stop after the teen reached into the back of his truck and did not comply with his commands to show his hands, according to the arrest affidavit. Brittain was holding a container — which his family members have said held antifreeze — and no evidence of firearms was found in or near the truck, the affidavit said.

A passenger with Brittain said he and the teen had been working on the transmission for Brittain’s truck. The passenger told investigators he never heard Davis tell the teen to show his hands.

Davis, who is white, was fired by Lonoke County Sheriff John Staley in July for not turning on his body camera until after the shooting occurred. Staley said there’s no footage from the shooting, only the aftermath.

Several members of Brittain’s family and friends shouted, “thank you Jesus,” as Phillips announced the charge. Phillips said a bond hearing for Davis would be held on Monday.

Two of the nation's best-known civil-rights attorneys -- Ben Crump of Florida and Devon Jacob of Pennsylvania -- are representing the Brittain family. From a report at he Daily Beast:

On Friday, Jeff Phillips, a special prosecutor assigned to the case, announced that Michael Davis, the sergeant who shot Brittain, will be charged with manslaughter for “recklessly” shooting at Brittain.

According to an affidavit read by Phillips at a press conference, Brittain was test-driving a pickup truck with his cousin that the two spent the night tinkering on at a local repair shop. The car, which had transmission issues, began smoking and was pulled over by Davis as it neared the repair shop.

In an interview with investigators, Davis said that before he could put his own car in park, Brittain jumped out and moved to the rear of the truck and began reaching into the bed as it slowly rolled backward. Davis said he gave commands to Brittain to show his hands that were ignored. When Brittain was about to remove his hands from the back of the truck, Davis said he shot once before he could see what Brittain was holding.

Davis’ attorney, Robert Newcomb, previously told the Daily Beast that Davis feared the worst when Brittain hopped out and reached into the bed of his truck.

But it turned out to just be a jug of antifreeze.

A relative was riding with Brittain, and he provided an account that differed significantly from what the deputy said:

Jordan King, Brittain’s cousin who was in the car with him at the time, said Brittain hopped out with the jug to place it behind the truck’s tires—which is something the teen always did to help stop the old truck. But King said Davis never gave any commands to Brittain before he shot him.

The two conflicting narratives were hampered by the fact that Davis’ body camera was never turned on during the quick encounter. Shortly after the shooting, Davis was fired by the Lonoke County Sheriff’s Office for breaking their body-camera policy.

The investigation of the shooting was quickly turned over to the Arkansas State Police. In July, Phillips, a prosecutor from a district on the other side of the state, was assigned to handle the case.

His press conference on Friday was brief and he refused to take questions. “I don’t want to jeopardize this case, it’s too important,” he said.

Crump, in a statement, said the charges were the first step “in the pursuit of justice” for Brittain, adding that his shooting was the “latest example of law enforcement shooting first and asking questions later.”

After Phillips’ announcement that a warrant would be issued for Davis’ arrest on Friday, the courtroom burst into cheers.

If convicted of manslaughter, Davis could be sentenced to a maximum of 10 years in prison.

His attorney, Newcomb, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Wendy Lindsey, Hunter’s cousin, said in an interview shortly after the announcement on Friday that she was happy “at least something was done.” But she added that she didn’t think the manslaughter charge for Davis was enough.

“I think it’s murder,” she said. “He took a life.”

Director Christopher Wray admits FBI botched sexual-abuse case regarding USA Gymnastics, which fits with his ties to Russia and various Alabama political thugs

USA gymnasts Simon Biles, McKayla Maroney, and Ali Raisman

 

The United States might soon be in need of a new FBI director after Trump nominee Christopher Wray admitted before a Senate panel yesterday that his agents failed to protect scores of female gymnasts who were victims of sexual assault at the hands of serial predator Larry Nassar. Four gymnasts testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee that the FBI mishandled their reports, flatly falsifying victim statements in some instances.

Wray, who has connections to the Deep South (including Alabama) was a dubious choice to lead the FBI from the beginning, considering his professional ties to Russia and to the "Alabama Gang" of right-wing bad actors, which includes former Trump Attorney General Jeff Sessions. Wray even could have roundabout ties to Alabama's 2022 Republican Party primary for the U.S. Senate if Rob Riley (son of former Gov. Bob Riley) chooses to make a run, as he reportedly is considering.

Multiple sources tell Legal Schnauzer that Riley and Wray have been chums since their time together at Yale Law School, with Riley serving as senior law journal editor in 1990-91 and Wray graduating in 1992. If Wray's directorship at the FBI turns into a scandal -- one marked by mistreatment of sexual-abuse victims -- would that be an impediment to a possible Rob Riley U.S. Senate run?

That's a probing question, given that Riley has significant ethical baggage on his own. In 2008, the Federal Election Commission (FEC) fined him $10,000 for his role in a campaign-finance ethics case. In 2013, Riley sought my unlawful arrest and incarceration over a civil case of alleged defamation, which received national and international news coverage for its blatant trampling of First Amendment principles. I was arrested because Riley sought a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction, both of which have been found to be unlawful prior restraints under more than 200 years of First Amendment law. (See Near v. Minnesota, 283 U.S. 697 (1931). It makes you wonder what Riley and Wray learned at Yale about constitutional law -- and if either one of them even supports a free press. Sara Rafsky, of the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) wrote an insightful analysis of Rob Riley's trampling of free-press rights and even spotlighted press statements he made that are plainly false.

As for Christopher Wray, if his FBI botched the U.S. gymnastics case, how many other cases has the bureau screwed up or ignored completely? Consider two cases of what appear to be attempted murder in the Birmingham area:

(1) The Bert Newsome vehicle crash -- In September 2020, Birmingham attorney Burt Newsome was hit head-on by a large SUV as he was engaged in litigation involving powerful corporate and legal entities -- Balch & Bingham, Alabama Power, Drummond Company -- in Alabama. From our report on the crash: 

The questionable ethics of the Balch Bingham law firm have been unmasked for the public, most prominently in the North Birmingham Superfund bribery case; perhaps most stunningly in the head-on vehicle crash that nearly claimed the life of attorney Burt Newsome, a recent courtroom adversary of Balch and its clients (Alabama Power, Drummond Company).

Evidence from the scene suggests the crash might have been staged, perhaps designed to intimidate, injure, or even kill Newsome. He did, in fact, sustain grave injuries, but is recovering from emergency trauma surgery and has even made a few trips to the office. 

[We invite you to check the crash-scene photo (below) and note the SUV's wheels are turned sharply right, directly into the driver's compartment of Newsome's vehicle; a similar turn to the left might have missed the Newsome car altogether, or at least, placed the impact on the passenger's compartment, which was vacant. Does this mean the SUV driver meant to hit not only Newsome's car, but the area where Newsome was seated?]

Two big questions: If the incident was staged, who staged it? Why was a Norfolk Southern employee driving the SUV, many miles from the company's local HQ in Irondale? We do not have the answers at this time.

(2) The shooting into David Roberson's vehicle on U.S. 280 -- In late February 2021, former Drummond executive David Roberson was driving south on 280 when someone fired a shot into his vehicle. From our report on the incident: 

The plaintiff in a $75-million lawsuit against Drummond Company and the Balch Bingham law firm was driving south on U.S. 280 near Birmingham on Friday when someone fired a shot into his vehicle.

Former Drummond executive David Roberson escaped shaken, but apparently unharmed. Details about the incident are scarce at the moment, but Roberson reported it to law enforcement. This marks the second time someone connected to the lawsuit has met with violence that apparently was designed to intimidate, severely injure, or kill. Burt Newsome, attorney for Roberson and his wife Anna, was hit head-on in a crash where the driver of an SUV appeared to veer directly into Newsome's Volkswagen Jetta. Newsome sustained a broken leg, which required insertion of a titanium rod during trauma surgery at UAB, along with other injuries.

Our research indicates that Christopher Wray's FBI has shown little or no interest in either case -- and the same goes for local law enforcement. Why? The USA Gymnastics case indicates Wray's FBI doesn't take much of anything seriously -- even child sexual abuse, of girls who went on to become athletes with world-class skills. From a report at Axios: 

Before a rarely unified Senate panel, the head of the FBI apologized for his agents failing to protect scores of U.S. gymnasts who were victims of sexual assault. 

"I am deeply and profoundly sorry to each and every one of you," said Director Christopher Wray.

Four gymnasts — McKayla Maroney, Simone Biles, Aly Raisman and Maggie Nichols — testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee and detailed how the FBI mishandled their reports.

• Maroney said the FBI "chose to lie about what" she said about the abuse she suffered at the hands of Larry Nassar and "protect a serial child molester rather than protect, not only me, but countless others."
• Raisman said agents told her "to keep" her reports "confidential and not tell anyone."
• Biles also blamed "an entire system that enabled and perpetrated his abuse.”

The bottom line: "I am sorry that so many people let you down over and over again, and I am especially sorry that there were people at the FBI who had their own chance to stop this monster back in 2015 and failed," Wray told the victims. 

Nassar is serving 40–175 years in prison. The FBI fired an agent accused of failing to properly investigate the sexual assault allegations, Wray said.

That Wray's FBI has proven to be incompetent and crooked should be no surprise to those who know about the director's previous associations, including those in Alabama. We will address those in upcoming posts.

(To be continued)

 

Burt Newsome crash scene