From: Abner Pedraza
Judson, This guy sounds worse than the rotten deep state that has attacked our country
and tried to overthrow the government. Typical Democrat move by an incompetent JUDGE!
Keep up the great work exposing this bastard! ABNER
From: Linda Collins
My God, does this guy ever stop with his corruption—right in the face of all of us.
So much arrogance, so much hubris.Thanks for keeping us updated. Linda Collins
From: Brian J. Mann
Jud,
How can the State Legislature close their eyes to this? It seems as if Chancellor Bouchard hurts companies instead of helping them. Certainly not good for Delaware’s business or future. So terribly absurd!
Keep up the good work. Love your articles.
Best regards,
Brian Mann
From: Archibald Lingo
Hey Judson,
The corruption in the Delaware Judiciary has been going on for years. The Democrats have become so blatant with it, it is apparent for all to see.
Unless we get rid of this Status Quo Legislature, nothing will change. Another Delaware incorporated company will bite the dust at the hands of Bouchard. He has got to go! Keep up the good work you do. ARCHIE
From: Bob Weiner
Judson: When a judge withholds public documents that people have a right to see, all kinds of red flags go up? When a Judge colludes with an attorney involved in a case he is presiding over, it is criminal. I can remember being so proud of being a Delawarean, but no more. It is hard to believe our state has become so business unfriendly! It used to be there was compromise, and reason, and yes justice. The likes of these Skadden Arps former lawyers and their collusion with each other is outrageous! “Inspirion Delivery Services, LLC” looks like another bad decision by this crazy Chancellor. This is simply outrageous. Keep the articles coming, maybe the boys in Dover will blink when they realize their jobs are in trouble. Keep up the pressure! BOB
From:Jack Renault
IMPEACH BOUCHARD! VOTE REPUBLICAN!
From – Charles Copland
Judson, you are really shaking things up and the people are talking. Subjective rulings without logic or standing on decided matters is bad business and is basically creating new law“legislating from the bench.” Why haven’t the Philip Shawe people filed for FOYA Requests to get the records? It will be interesting to see if Bouchard continues to feather his cronies’ nests? Keep up the good work. CHARLIE
From: Carol Wagner
Wow, more of the same. This business with TransPerfect and now another fiasco in the Chancery Court. I can’t believe what a blind eye these liberal jerks in our state house have. Unfortunately, if the people in Washington think there is a Swamp — check out Delaware — IT IS PURE QUICKSAND! Thanks for your efforts JUD. Keep the bastards thinking. Great work! Best regards, Carol
From: Ed Speraw
Why would anybody want to incorporate in Delaware, when the Chancellor can sell your company out from under you? Seems like things are going from bad to worse. If Delaware loses its franchise taxes, the red hole will be so deep, “Hades” will be a cool place in comparison. Keep exposing this jerk, Judson.
We love your articles. ED
From: Adrian Bellinger
Dear Mr. Bennett,
As a small business owner incorporated in Delaware I am extremely concerned. It is beyond me why the legislature which is controlled by the Democrats is so business unfriendly. Eventually, the bottom is going to fall out if Chancellor Bouchard keeps creating these untenable situations. You don’t force the sale of a company because of stockholder or director disagreements.. Might have to reorganize in Nevada! I appreciate your great writing and your guts. Thank you.
Adrian Bellinger
I implore you to carefully read the 2014 National Review article below entitled, “The Strine Strain: Some Judges Take a Toll on Justice.” As I’m sure you’ll remember from my articles (because no one else will cover it), Strine was BOUCHARD’S Intern. Many Delawareans I have talked with think this relationship is somehow OK (debatable) because it was the other way around. I’m telling you, it is not! When they were both at Skadden Arps, Chancellor Andre Bouchard was the big-boss-man over our Chief Justice/Intern Leo Strine — and, as you’ll see from this article, the apple didn’t fall far from the poisonous tree.
For those who think I am alone and whimsical in pushing for drastic judicial reforms, with “radical ideas” such as the disclosure of court-ordered bills as required by law, the random assigning of judges to cases, disclosure of relationships (like Bouchard and the infamous, Kevin Shannon of the TransPerfect case), and jury trials to put a check on the Chancellor’s sweeping power, which are so omnipotent that they are ripe for abuse. See the article below from The National Review in 2014. Please note, I’m neither condoning or condemning the controversial author, but he’s obviously highly-educated, articulate, and understands firsthand what I, and many of my readers view plainly as a pattern of corruption by Delaware Chief Chancellor Andre Bouchard.
He writes: “After Strine enthroned others in control of our companies, his protégés enriched themselves obscenely and the companies eventually went bankrupt, wiping out $2 billion of shareholders’ equity dispersed among average people in every U.S. state and Canadian province.” Sound familiar, like another victim of the infamous Bouchard-Strine two-step tango that saw the court’s close friends at Skadden seemingly abscond with over $25 million in fees for “undisclosed services” as was implemented by the “court- ordered custodian” in the TransPerfect case.
When you read this, remember, this article is just about Bouchard’s Intern Strine. Bouchard was astonishingly permitted to help Strine elevate his personal career when Bouchard was on the Judicial Nominating Committee of the Bar Association. Then disgustingly, one hand washed the other, and Strine returned the favor by elevating Bouchard. Now, as I see it, the true Skadden Arps (puppet) master of enriching Delaware good ole boy cronies is now our Chief Chancellor, Andre Bouchard. God help us — absent judicial reform.
By CONRAD BLACK | February 19, 2014 9:00 AM
The elevation of Leo E. Strine, the chancellor in Delaware’s Chancery Court, which is the principal corporate-law court of the United States, to chief justice of Delaware would not normally attract much comment. Delaware is one of the smallest and least populous states and is chiefly known as a place of incorporation and for the historic presence of the du Pont family and the DuPont chemical company. (Pierre S. “Pete” du Pont IV was a recent and well-known governor.) Because Delaware became the preferred place of incorporation as the American industrial and financial boom lifted off after the Civil War, it has had great importance as a commercial jurisdiction. Leo Strine — a well-connected Democrat and former aide to a Democratic governor, current U.S. senator Thomas Carper — served 15 years on the Chancery Court, three as head (chancellor) of it, and built a reputation that extended throughout the corporate community of the United States and beyond, as a sometimes controversial, outspoken, whimsical, and decisive judge.
None of these need be negative characteristics, but he is, in fact, a hip-shooter, who fancies himself a very blithe wit and feeds on the sycophantic laughter of counsel and their clients appearing before him. He follows cases closely, produces verdicts and judgments promptly, and clearly possesses a sharp intelligence, but he has periodically lapsed into discursive speculation on irrelevant subjects, including in one instance the religious affiliations of contending parties (without implying any bigotry, but with a distracted concern for matters unrelated to the case). He was rebuked by the court he will now head, when the state supreme court reminded judges not to use their positions in trials as “a platform from which to propagate their individual world views on issues not presented.” Strine frequently reveals himself as a fervent sports fan and engages in popular-culture references that do enliven his interventions and even decisions, as if to fortify his unprepossessing Mr. Peepers appearance.
There is not really anything wrong with any of this either, and judges could often do with a little loosening up, as they often affect undue severity in their dickies and robes and on their elevated platforms where they rule with almost unquestionable authority. In fact, complaints of this kind disguise the real problem with Strine: that, while he is intelligent and quick, he is a compulsive attention-seeker and often says injudicious things and produces bad and unjust judgments. He, like a significant number of judges, but more vividly than all but a few, is like a hyperactive version of F. Scott Fitzgerald’s description of the rich drifters of The Great Gatsby: “They were careless people. . . . They smashed up things and creatures and then retreated back into their vast carelessness . . . and let other people clean up the mess they had made.” As his spouting of contemporary pop-culture jargon portends, Strine is trendy, and combines Bacon’s famously disparaged “much-talking judge” with the contemporary description of much of the bench as “the Zeitgeist in robes.”
Readers will discern that I speak from experience. I testified in Strine’s court at length in a case where companies controlled by my associates and me were involved. He signaled clearly in the preliminary meeting with counsel that he had already determined the case against us and my counsel advised me to fold and act otherwise against our opponents. With no optimism about the outcome of the impending trial, I concluded that that would produce the same result with the additional appearance of cowardice on our part, and the case proceeded. He was perfectly courteous to me as a witness and we even exchanged a few quips and a bit of jaunty badinage, and he has subsequently referred to me quite politely, even with the affected comradeliness of a former adversary whom he bested. But he wrote a judgment that did extreme damage to the interests of tens of thousands of shareholders and was largely debunked in subsequent proceedings in various courts, including a four-month criminal trial. After Strine enthroned others in control of our companies, his protégés enriched themselves obscenely and the companies eventually went bankrupt, wiping out $2 billion of shareholders’ equity dispersed among average people in every U.S. state and Canadian province. The faction he upheld at trial — to Strine’s professed amazement, as any indication of his fallibility seems to amaze him — ultimately agreed to a $5 million (Canadian) settlement of my libel suit, by far the largest such payment in Canadian history, as part of an overall resolution, in my favor, of a complex of related lawsuits.
I certainly cannot blame Strine alone for the fact that I was wrongly convicted and sent to prison for three years, before the charges that he had helped to generate were abandoned, rejected by jurors, or unanimously vacated by the U.S. Supreme Court. Injustices occur, and given the correlation of forces between the U.S. government (and its Canadian Quislings) and myself, I did well to put it behind me as soon as I did. (Prosecutors were seeking life imprisonment and $140 million in fines and restitutions, and finally got three years and two weeks, and $600,000. And Richard Posner of the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago, the dean of all flippantly opinionated American judges, had to retrieve two counts to achieve even that for the prosecution Strine effectively solicited.) I am personally philosophical, found my time in prison quite interesting, and even enjoyed a few aspects of it, especially helping over a hundred students to matriculate from secondary school. It was completely unjust that I was there, but I tried to make the best and most of it; and the world is not a rose garden for anyone.
My point is not personal bitterness toward Strine and Posner, though my regard for them is not unlimited. My grievance is that these two, and an appreciable number of other judges, simply bang down their gavels, bring down resonant and histrionic decisions that are apt to be completely mistaken and to inflict injustice, and continue in their terminal self-absorption. When we first appeared before Posner, he seemed not even to have read our papers, and much of his fatuous judgment that would soon be shredded by the high court was a description, in reference to the so-called Ostrich Rule, of the habits of the ostrich. Strine acknowledged in his judgment against us that a reasonable person might find entirely differently, and reasonable people eventually did, though Posner, not being in that category, was not one of them. The U.S. Supreme Court was. But Strine and Posner and similarly wired judges just drive on, never apparently reflecting on the impact their capricious decisions have, or wondering if a little Solomonic deliberation might better serve society or even enhance their ultimate reputations as jurists.
Posner, at least, was frustrated in his ambitions to reach the highest court; he blamed this on his advocacy of legalized marijuana, though such brainwaves as his proposal to make the adoption of children straight financial auctions might have had something to do with it. He has, in his irritation, taken to public criticism of the U.S. Supreme Court, sometimes justly. But his complaint that the justices of that court interrupt counsel too much is a bit rich; at our first appearance before him, though my counsel was a very respected former deputy solicitor general of the United States, Posner allowed him to complete only 15 percent of the sentences he initiated. His manner was querulous, antagonistic, and boorish. Justice Scalia called him a “liar,” and in our case he was censured by the whole Supreme Court, in a judgment written by Justice Ginsburg, for “the infirmity of invented law.” No doubt he has had his moments, but he has been drinking his own bathwater for decades and he must subside soon.
Strine, who is approximately 50, cannot possibly imagine that his career ends in the highest court of the dollhouse state of Delaware. Both judges should wear bells on their heads like medieval lepers to warn the unsuspecting of their approach. They are a menace, not because of lack of ability, but because of helpless thralldom to their own self-worship. Strine claimed in his confirmation hearings that he wished to fortify Delaware’s status as America’s premier corporate jurisdiction. Doing so will require a miraculously successful lobotomy or the greatest revelation since Zechariah was struck dumb in the Temple. Failing such astounding developments, corporate America should decamp, to other countries, and certainly to other states, as Delaware will pay for his elevation.
— Conrad Black is the author of Franklin Delano Roosevelt: Champion of Freedom, Richard M. Nixon: A Life in Full, A Matter of Principle, and the recently published Flight of the Eagle: The Grand Strategies That Brought America from Colonial Dependence to World Leadership.
Is this America? You have to wonder… when your Chief Chancellor Andre Bouchard is once again making a Stalin-like decision to dissolve a solvent company, rather than letting the private sector solve its own problem — which it would do, if the Court would stay out of it.
Equity-only courts, like the Chancery Court in Delaware, have been officially outlawed in 48 of 50 States! Only Delaware and Tennessee allow judges such unfettered power without the checks and balances of a jury.
It’s a court run by a man who appears to be absorbed by making companies spend and spend to solve simple problems. You appear to have deadlock here. Why not do what Delaware Supreme Court Justice Valihura demanded in the TransPerfect Global case, and expand the Board? In my view, the answer to “why not?” is because these decisions do not allow for Chancellor Bouchard to enrich his so called, elite, Delaware, lawyer friends and Skadden Arps buddies!!
Why would Bouchard do the equivalent of dropping a nuclear bomb on employees, their families, the U.S. Constitution and all business law precedence in America before his regime? The fly-swatter of an expanded Board can solve any deadlock, but where is the money for greedy Bouchard in something so simple? Bouchard’s pals would not profit from such simple American logic if it were applied here.
Simply put folks: Bouchard’s court, in my opinion, has turned into a money-making machine for his friends and cronies. How much money will be spent in the process? How much money could get funneled to all of his pals in the court-system?
We must rise up and stop this nefarious trend by a self- serving Judge who seems to be using the system for his own advantage? The Bar Association always has to go in front of him and plead their cases for his entire 12-year term, so they are beholden to obey Bouchard’s will. Folks, “the fox is guarding the hen house”! From my perspective, our elected General Assembly must step up for the people, reign in this-what I call-“business-terrorist jurist”, and restore the balance of power in our State before it is too late.
Instead, Bouchard’s solutions are un-American and insanely expensive. Bouchard has yet to explain any of the details or unseal the case where he ordered $250 million of TransPerfect’s money to be spent. The solution should be that Bouchard expands a company’s Board and lets the private sector make these decisions.
Instead, it is obvious to me and many others, he chooses to make the company “government controlled” — where he can make his cronies and good old boys richer and richer. He can pay back those who supported him to become Chancellor with no bench experience.
To me folks–It’s a crime, I see it plain as day, and it has to stop.
I pledge to talk to the employees of this recent company fiasco in Bouchard’s Court as well — just like TransPerfect — and give you honest reporting of any atrocities that Bouchard’s lackeys commit when he puts them in charge. According to employees, one woman at TransPerfect is still in therapy from the intimidation of Bouchard’s appointed Custodian and the fear of losing her job.
Folks, it is my absolute opinion, If the hubris of this inexperienced, petulant, greed-ridden, all-powerful Chancellor is not reigned in, Delaware’s image as once the #1 place for corporations — whatever is left of it and what’s left of Delaware’s economy — will be gone.
I implore you, my readers: Please call your elected state legislators, and tell them you will not stand, for what I consider, this corrupt behavior in our judiciary! IT IS GOING TO BE AN ISSUE IN THE 2020 ELECTION !
Please read the article below and any feedback you send me will be appreciated.
Here is the Law360 story:
By Vince Sullivan
Law360 (May 17, 2019, 7:03 PM EDT) — A Delaware Chancellor ordered the liquidation and dissolution of a pharmaceutical development company Friday, saying disagreements among the company’s three managers have created a deadlock that has frozen operations and doomed its future prospects.
Chancellor Andre G. Bouchard said Inspirion Delivery Sciences LLC cannot move forward because its operating agreement doesn’t provide a mechanism to resolve the differences facing members Stefan Aigner, Raymond DiFalco and Manish Shah, and there is no practical way for the business to continue.
“Underlying the rupture in their relationship, Aigner, DiFalco and Shah have been at loggerheads over issues of fundamental importance to the company and its future … ,” Chancellor Bouchard said in his opinion. “In sum, the current state of play at the company is that the board consists of three managers, two of whom disagree vehemently on issues critical to the company’s management and business strategy.”
The fissures began to show about two years ago, the opinion said, when Aigner, on one hand, and DiFalco and Shah, on the other, disagreed on supply contracts for the production of the company’s opioid abuse-prevention drug technology. The unique corporate governance structure required that Aigner and either DiFalco or Shah agree on corporate actions, but a dispute over DiFalco and Shah’s ownership of the company Inspirion contracted with to manufacture its drug led to the deadlock.
A series of acrimonious actions and reactions followed, with Aigner accused of trying to eliminate DiFalco’s veto rights using the conflict-of-interest provisions in the operating agreements, the opinion said.
Aigner filed suit in late 2018 seeking declarations that would cement his control of the company while limiting DiFalco’s management role, and DiFalco filed counterclaims seeking a dissolution of the company.
The agreement allows for the appointment of an independent representative to vote in DiFalco’s place when issues arise with supply contracts that implicate DiFalco’s other businesses, Chancellor Bouchard said. But DiFalco’s independent representative resigned in the fall of 2018, followed by Shah’s resignation, leaving just Aigner and DiFalco as voting members.
The opinion said the independent representative mechanism could work to resolve the differences between the two, but the chancellor determined it was highly likely the remaining managers would deadlock on the appointment of a replacement representative.
Even if there were a new representative selected or appointed by the court, the opinion said the mechanism is fatally flawed due to the ambiguous language in the operating agreement that gives no concrete definition of a conflict or when a manager would be required to disclose a conflict that would call the independent representative to the table to vote.
The deadlock has prevented Inspirion from selecting a contractor to manufacture its opioid abuse-prevention drug technology and has made it nearly impossible to monetize its valuable intellectual property, Chancellor Bouchard said.
“Under these circumstances, the court concludes that dissolution of the company is the best and only realistic option to force the parties to find a resolution where they have failed before, or if they cannot, to yield value for them by selling the company’s assets,” the opinion said.
William T. Reid IV of Reid Collins & Tsai, representing DiFalco, told Law360 Friday that the court’s decision will hopefully help in the development of new drugs to combat the opioid epidemic.
“This is an important victory for our client that will hopefully free up the technology so desperately needed to help those affected by the opioid epidemic,” Reid said. “We’re grateful that this court took the rare step of ordering a dissolution of the dysfunctional company.”
Representatives for Aigner did not immediately respond Friday to a request for comment.
Inspirion was formed in 2008 to develop drugs that would prevent the abuse of opioids by maintaining the time-release properties of opiate-based medications even after the pills were crushed and ingested, according to the opinion. It brought one such drug, MorphaBond, to market, and received regulatory approvals for a second drug, RoxyBond.
Aigner is represented by Peter B. Ladig and Brett M. McCartney of Bayard PA, and David H. Wollmuth and Michael C. Ledley of Wollmuth Maher & Deutsch LLP.
DiFalco is represented by Norman H. Monhait and Carmela P. Keener of Rosenthal Monhait & Goddess PA, and William T. Reid IV, Michael Yoder, Jordan L. Vimont and Ryan M. Goldstein of Reid Collins & Tsai LLP.
The case is Acela Investments LLC et al. v. Raymond DiFalco et al., case number 2018-0558, in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware.
–Editing by Jack Karp.
Dear Friends,
Politics is a very rough game. There is no doubt, that anybody who runs for public office must be prepared to have their entire life exposed for all the world to see. Frankly folks ,I have been involved in every aspect of this nasty business as a member of Delaware’s Republican Party. I have done everything from licking stamps, stuffing envelopes, being a large political contributor, being an elected official, a district chairman, a delegate to the convention, a political consultant, a two time campaign manager-once for Governor and once for US Senate, TWICE a candidate for County Council, and to being a lobbyist in the General Assembly. I did this stuff for over 20 years. I am now a political pundit who is educated, audacious, wise, and unafraid to say exactly what I think. If you don’t like it too bad. I always get some people who say “Take me off your list. Then six more people ask to sign up. At this point I would categorize myself as a conservative with a few social exceptions. I have an e-mail network that I have accumulated over the years that reaches over 6000 people in the state of Delaware. I support Donald Trump’s platform 100% and I truly believe that Senator Tom Carper is no longer qualified to represent Delaware. He is so jaded that it is a frightening scenario to think that he might continue as a US Senator. It seems as if the Democrats are continuously moving toward more and more socialism every day.
There are two people running in the Delaware Republican Party to be the Republican candidate for the United States Senate from Delaware against incumbent Senator Tom Carper. The two candidates are Gene Truono who is a solid conservative, a devout Christian, an attorney, and someone who is knowlegble about economics and the recovery agenda that Trump is bringing to America. The other candidate is Sussex County Councilman Rob Arlett. I have heard some disconcerting comments from the Arlett camp about Gene Truono for reasons that are in today’s modern climate, not even worth considering. This attitude, in my opinion, is just plain ignorant and stupid. One thing for sure, “people in glass houses should never throw stones.”
I appreciate any candidate who runs for public office, because I know how hard it is.Although a decent man, Rob Arlett, in my opinion, cannot defeat Tom Carper (even though the Senator is vulnerable and is moving further to the left). On 9/5/09 Arlett had a foreclosure with LM Mortgage –case # SO9L-09-37, Arlett filed personal Bankruptcy –case # 101335, On 6/ 21/2011, he filed Chapter 13 Bankruptcy for $356,330 dollars-case # 111189, and on 11/12/2016 he had a sheriff’s sale to satisfy the foreclosure for $551, 852.57. Arlett had two State of Delaware Tax Liens, one in the amount of $9,097 and another in the amount of $4,172. Finally he had a Federal Tax Lien in the amount of $68,000. Folks, it is unlikely this man can be elected over Tom Carper, because bankruptcies and tax liens are usually detrimental for achieving victory in any election, regardless of the personal circumstances or time it occurred . It is a true uphill battle. The voters don’t want to hear about financial problems past or present from any candidate. It is unfortunate, however that is the way it is in this savage and difficult arena.
Gene Truono , on the other hand has enjoyed an impeccable financial record, he is an expert on economics and the constitution, and supports President Donald Trump’s agenda completely. I have to go with Gene Truono in this battle folks. He is the better candidate and has the better chance of winning against Tom Carper.
Please vote for Gene Truono for the United States Senate on September 6th in the Delaware Republican primary. I want a Republican candidate who has an excellent chance of defeating Carper and by doing so, will go to Washington to help Donald Trump complete his agenda. Gene Truono can actually win, while Arlett has no shot in my educated opinion. Some of you who are blinded by your personal prejudices and short sighted considerations, I am asking you to think logically about this primary election. If you choose Gene Truono in this primary, you will have an excellent opportunity to elect a new Senator from the State of Delaware who is a Republican. I urge you to give Gene Truono your vote and let us help the US Senate by adding another Republican to our government.
Endorsement of Gene Truono for US Senate in the Delaware Republican Primary !
>
PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT!
>
>” I don’t know why people would ask my opinion on anything, but they do sometimes.
>
> I have been asked repeatedly since I moderated a Republican Senatorial Primary Debate between Rob Arlett, and Gene Truono, who am I voting for in the Republican primary to choose who will go up against the ultra liberal democrat Senator Tom Carper in the general election? If you missed the debate, here is my broadcast of the debate:
>
> https://www.spreaker.com/…/delaware-republican-senatorial-p…
>
> Let me preface my statement with this; either Republican candidate would be a far site better than the current debacle we now have misrepresenting Delaware in Washington DC.
>
> That said, having moderated what I thought was a very good debate at the American Legion in Dover, Delaware, and having watched subsequent debates, and having asked VERY difficult questions to Gene Truono…..
>
> I am VOTING for Gene Truono in the Republican Primary.
>
> Here is why:
>
> 1. I appreciate Gene’s incredible sincerity… Not to say I think Rob isn’t sincere; however, I find Gene Truono to be refreshingly sincere and authentic.
>
> If you want to clearly know where Gene Truono stands on an issue, just ask him. Gene will articulately represent his view in an impossible to misunderstand manner, REGARDLESS of who is asking.
>
> Simply put, Gene’s answer is NOT political, it is honest, practical, and as I have found, the right answer.
>
> 2. At the debate, and in most political debates, candidates tend to use every possible second, and then some seconds OVER their time to talk as long as they possibly can.
>
> In the debate I moderated, Gene Truono clearly, quickly, and accurately answered every question presented to him, and on the one occasion Gene wasn’t sure of the answer, he answered this way; “I don’t know. I will find out and get back to you.” Refreshingly, Gene never required the full two minutes to answer ANY question. When he was finished answering the question clearly and honestly, he simply sat down.
>
> And, he did answer clearly and quickly over and over.
>
> Have you ever heard a candidate NOT give some bloviated non answer to just occupy their 2 minutes of time, and hope their answer convinces some folks in the audience that the question was answered. Neither have I…. Until Gene Truono. I respect that.
>
> 3. On the issues I believe Gene Truono is in alignment with my stand, and what I believe is best for Delaware. All of them, not some of them, all of them.
>
> 4. I believe Gene can bring about change, positive change. Not a bunch of talk, but action. The issues we face are complex, but I am confident Gene can easily handle the most complex of issues, because he has been doing just that his whole life.
>
> 5. Gene’s answers and policy positions are congruent and consistent no matter who is in the audience, or asking the question. His answers are his answers, his beliefs are his beliefs, no matter who is asking.
>
> 6. There are many “conservative Christians” who will point to Gene being gay and say they “simply cannot vote for a gay candidate!”
>
> Then, they will self righteously allege Gene will “push a gay agenda and support issues antithetical to conservatives” even though there is ZERO evidence to support that claim.
>
> I challenge you to ask Gene where he stands on those issues… Then, call me. I will enjoy listening to sheepish religious Rottweilers eat their own words.
>
> 7. Gene is unabashedly PRO LIFE.
> 8. Gene is unabashedly PRO Second Amendment.
> 9. Gene is unabashedly PRO Constitution.
> 10. Gene not only understands President Trump, he absolutely supports his agenda and has a plan to effectively implement that agenda in Delaware.
>
> That includes effective law enforcement, including protecting our borders and once and for all dealing with ILLEGAL Immigration. If you don’t think Delaware has a serious illegal immigration problem, you aren’t looking.
>
> Bottom line? I agree with Gene Truono… on nearly everything.
>
> Let me add this… I was blown away to learn how Gene has served ALL communities… Poor, white, black, allllll communities, without anyone looking, for decades, with no votes at stake. Nothing to win, just because. This guy is one principled dude.
>
> Listen, I could list 1-100 reasons why I am supporting Gene Truono, but you don’t have time for that, you need to be busy helping Conservatives defeat ultra liberal Tom Carper.
>
> Having now met Gene and having spent considerable time with him, I consider Gene Truono a trusted and good friend.
>
> Time is running short… Conservatives MUST flood the polls in September. No matter what.
>
> Collision of Faith and Politics Radio Show with The Ninja Pastor, Rev. Dr. Shawn Michael Greener
“As I have said many times publicly, I support the President and his administration. Like the President, I am an outsider and a businessman, not a politician.” Gene Truono, Candidate for U.S. Senate
https://www.delaware1059.com/content/tncms/live/
· Rob Petree
· Jun 25, 2018 Updated Jun 25, 2018
· (1)
A challenge of conservatism has ramped up the rhetoric between two candidates in Delaware’s race for U.S. Senate when Rob Arlett called Gene Truono a “party crasher” after it was learned he changed his party affiliation from Independent a few months prior to launching his campaign for the Republican nomination.
Truono appeared on the Dan Gaffney Show Monday morning where he claimed he supported more Republican policies than Arlett who told our Susan Monday in an earlier interview that “there’s a lot of things in the party that I don’t agree to, but the reality is it’s not about party politics, it’s about putting the focus back on the people.”
Your browser does not support the audio element.
“I really support almost all of the platform of the Republican party. I reviewed it in detail in detail before I decided to run for office, which is why I decided to run as a Republican. And I reviewed it again most recently and I think of all the positions, both domestic and foreign, I fully support” he said. “The only one actually in the platform that I don’t is the gay marriage issue, otherwise I think I am very aligned with the National Republican Committee. I haven’t heard back from Rob on what positions he doesn’t support.”
Arlett was quick to fire back, at which time he called Truono a “party crasher” and pointed out that he changed his party affiliation from Independent to Republican to launch a bid for U.S. Senate.
Your browser does not support the audio element.
“I don’t know where my opponent is coming from because he has no record because he’s only come into the Republican party seven or eight months ago, specifically to run for the U.S. Senate,” he said. “I would call my opponent a ‘party crasher’ because he’s crashed the Republican party specifically to run for the U.S. Senate. So, the question would be why would he not just run as an independent. If he was always an Independent, then why would he crash the Republican party? It makes no sense to any Republican, truth be told.”
Truono said he changed his party affiliation in August, 2017. He cited how President Trump was a registered Democrat before he was an Independent and before he was Republican. He claimed party affiliation doesn’t transcend to someone’s values and principles, and that he’s been a conservative all his life.
The two candidates went head to head in a debate last week in Milton. The state’s primary election will take place September 6th. Polls will be open from 7 a.m. to 8 p.m., and only registered voters from participating parties may vote.
Stay up to date, set your car radio to Delaware 105.9FM – Listen LIVE
A description of politics in the US since the mid sixties.
Evan Douglas Sayet is a comedian and conservative speaker. He is the nation’s leading conservative speaker, an in-demand Master of Ceremony for Republican events. Sayet is the author of The Kinder Garden Of Eden: How The Modern Liberal Thinks And Why He’s Convinced That Ignorance Is Bliss.
He Fights. by Evan Sayet
My Leftist friends (as well as many ardent #Never Trumpers) constantly ask me if I’m not bothered by Donald Trump’s lack of decorum.
They ask if I don’t think his tweets are “beneath the dignity of the office.” Here’s my answer: We Right-thinking people have tried dignity. There could not have been a man of more quiet dignity than George W Bush as he suffered the outrageous lies and politically motivated hatreds that undermined his presidency.
We tried propriety: has there been a nicer human being ever than Mitt Romney? And the results were always the same.
This is because, while we were playing by the rules of dignity, collegiality and propriety, the Left has been, for the past 60 years, engaged in a knife fight where the only rules are those of Saul Alinsky and the Chicago mob.
I don’t find anything “dignified,” “collegial” or “proper” about Barack Hussain Obama’s lying about what went down on the streets of Ferguson in order to ramp up racial hatreds because racial hatreds serve the Democratic Party.
I don’t see anything “dignified” in lying about the deaths of four Americans in Benghazi and imprisoning an innocent filmmaker to cover your tracks. I don’t see anything “statesman-like” in weaponizing the IRS to be used to destroy your political opponents and any dissent. Yes, Obama was “articulate” and “polished” but in no way was he in the least bit “dignified,” “collegial” or “proper.”
The Left has been engaged in a war against America since the rise of the Children of the ’60s. To them, it has been an all-out war where nothing is held sacred and nothing is seen as beyond the pale. It has been a war they’ve fought with violence, the threat of violence, demagoguery and lies from day one and the violent take-over of the universities till today.
The problem is that, through these years, the Left has been the only side fighting this war. While the Left has been taking a knife to anyone who stands in their way, the Right has continued to act with dignity, collegiality and propriety. With Donald Trump, this all has come to an end. Donald Trump is America ‘s first wartime president in the Culture War.
During wartime, things like “dignity” and “collegiality” simply aren’t the most essential qualities one looks for in their warriors. Ulysses Grant was a drunk whose behavior in peacetime might well have seen him drummed out of the Army for conduct unbecoming.
Had Abraham Lincoln applied the peacetime rules of propriety and booted Grant, the Democrats might well still be holding their slaves today. Lincoln rightly recognized that, “I cannot spare this man. He fights…”
General George Patton was a vulgar-talking, son-of-a-bitch. In peacetime, this might have seen him stripped of rank. But, had Franklin Roosevelt applied the normal rules of decorum then, Hitler and the Socialists would be five decades into their thousand-year Reich.
Trump is fighting. And what’s particularly delicious is that, like Patton standing over the battlefield as his tanks obliterated Rommel’s, he’s shouting, “You magnificent bastard, I read your book!” That is just the icing on the cake, but it’s wonderful to see that not only is Trump fighting, he’s defeating the Left using their own tactics and that’s what they really hate.
That book is Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals a book so essential to the Liberals’ war against America that it is and was the playbook for the entire Obama administration andthe subject of Hillary Clinton’s senior thesis. It is a book of such pure evil, that, just as the rest of us would dedicate our book to those we most love or those to whom we are most indebted.
Trump’s tweets may seem rash and unconsidered but, in reality, he is doing exactly what Alinsky suggested his followers do. First, instead of going after “the fake media” and they are so fake that they have literally gotten every single significant story of the past 60 years not just wrong, but diametrically opposed to the truth, from the Tet Offensive to Benghazi, to what really happened on the streets of Ferguson, Missouri, Trump isolated CNN. He made it personal.
Then, just as Alinsky suggests, he employs ridicule which Alinsky described as “the most powerful weapon of all” … Most importantly, Trump’s tweets have put CNN in an untenable and unwinnable position. … They need to respond. This leaves them with only two choices. They can either “go high” (as Hillary would disingenuously declare of herself and the fake news would disingenuously report as the truth) and begin to honestly and accurately report the news or they can double-down on their usual tactics and hope to defeat Trump with twice their usual hysteria and demagoguery. The problem for CNN (et al.) with the former is that, if they were to start honestly reporting the news, that would be the end of the Democratic Party they serve.
It is nothing but the incessant use of fake news (read: propaganda) that keeps the Left alive.Imagine, for example, if CNN had honestly and accurately reported then-candidate Barack Obama’s close ties to foreign terrorists (Rashid Khalidi), domestic terrorists (William Ayers), the mafia (Tony Rezko) or the true evils of his spiritual mentor, Jeremiah Wright’s church. Imagine if they had honestly and accurately conveyed the evils of the Obama administration’s weaponizing of the IRS to be used against their political opponents or his running of guns to the Mexican cartels or the truth about the murder of Ambassador Christopher Stevens and the Obama administration’s cover-up.
So, to my friends on the Left and the #Never Trumpers as well do I wish we lived in a time when our president could be “collegial” and “dignified” and “proper”? Of course I do. These aren’t those times. This is war. And it’s a war that the Left has been fighting without opposition for the past 50 years.
So, say anything you want about this president – I get it – he can be vulgar, he can be crude, he can be undignified at times. I don’t care. I can’t spare this warrior. He fights for America! Fight on you magnificent bastard.
Once again folks, we have the U.S. Department of Justice chiming in on Skadden Arps and our Chancery Court. And, it ain’t pretty! The mess Bouchard and Pincus made while emptying TransPerfect’s corporate coffers, in my opinion, to benefit themselves and it keeps getting worse. Please remember who has been telling you that the many awful black-eyes will keep coming and coming for our state, and for our Chancery Court, under the inauspicious leadership of Andre Bouchard.
The latest headline: The DOJ just accused TransPerfect of discriminating against dual citizens and non-U.S. citizens when helping Clifford Chance’s staff organize a project in 2017.
NEWSFLASH folks: TransPerfect Management wasn’t in charge in 2017, our Delaware Chancery Court was. And it is plain-as day to me that Skadden was so busy fleecing and mismanaging the company as I see it with its illegal 3-year $1,475-per-hour occupation of the company that apparently it supervised conduct that the DOJ believes is absolutely illegal.
THIS IS OUTRIGHT CRAZY!! WHEN WILL WE STAND UP TO THIS PERCEIVED CORRUPTION IN THE DELAWARE CHANCERY? WHEN, I ASK?!
For more on how Chancellor Bouchard, Custodian Robert Pincus, and repeat DOJ offender — Skadden Arps — used the Chancery Court’s power to direct what the DOJ calls a “pattern of discriminatory and illegal behavior” — Please read the story below.
Folks, It’s only going to get worse and worse for the Chancery Court, who still will not, despite repeated requests, unseal the documents in the case.
MORE THAN EVER, I would love to hear your thoughts on this situation, and any comments on how honest on-lookers can bring these Delaware elites to justice.
Originally published by Law360:
By Dani Kass
Law360 (May 9, 2019, 11:36 PM EDT) — The U.S. Department of Justice has accused TransPerfect of discriminating against dual citizens and non-U.S. citizens when helping Clifford Chance staff up a project in 2017.
The DOJ’s complaint, filed Wednesday in the Office of the Chief Administrative Hearing Officer, claims the staffing company violated the Immigration and Nationality Act when it honored the firm’s request to only recruit and hire people who were citizens of the U.S. exclusively. Clifford Chance LLP ended the DOJ’s probe into it in August by paying a $132,000 penalty, without admitting liability.
TransPerfect’s attorney, Martin P. Russo of Kruzhkov Russo PLLC, told Law360 that the alleged misconduct took place while the company was under a court-ordered custodianship. As part of a high-profile fight between TransPerfect’s founders, Philip Shawe and Elizabeth Elting, for control of the company, a Delaware Chancery Court in 2015 placed Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom LLP’s Robert B. Pincus as custodian, namely to sell the business. Shawe ended up buying Elting out in a deal the court approved in February 2018, effectively ending Pincus’ custodianship.
The DOJ says the firm — which it does not identify in the complaint — used TransPerfect to staff up on attorneys for a temporary document review project. For several months in 2017, TransPerfect only recruited and hired U.S. citizens, and for most of the time only hired citizens who didn’t hold a second passport, the government claims.
The INA bars employers from intentionally discriminating against U.S. citizens or nationals, lawful permanent residents, asylees, and refugees during the hiring process, unless it falls under a legal carve out, the DOJ said.
“TransPerfect maintains that it did not violate the statutes alleged or engage in any conduct that was outside the bounds of the law,” Russo said.
In August, the DOJ said the U.S. arm of Clifford Chance violated anti-discrimination provisions of the INA by terminating three employees and refusing to consider eligible job candidates for 36 document-review roles because of their citizenship status from March to July 2017.
Clifford Chance had told investigators that it placed a citizenship-based staffing restriction on a specific document-review project because it believed it was required by the International Traffic in Arms Regulations, or ITAR, which in certain circumstances requires only a “U.S. person” to review highly sensitive materials.
But the DOJ said the firm misunderstood its obligations under the ITAR and that the regulations did not excuse discrimination on the basis of immigration status or nationality.
The new suit is against Chancery Staffing Solutions LLC, which is the successor to TransPerfect Staffing Solutions LLC. The company does business now as TransPerfect Staffing Solutions and TransPerfect Legal Solutions, the DOJ said. The government is hoping to get civil penalties, back pay on behalf of the workers who faced alleged discrimination, and other relief to “correct and prevent discrimination.”
“Staffing agencies must be diligent in satisfying their obligation under the INA to avoid citizenship status discrimination against U.S. citizens and protected non-citizens, even when that discrimination is requested by a client,” Eric Dreiband of the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division said in a statement. “The Department of Justice is committed to challenging such unlawful and discriminatory hiring practices.”
Skadden and Clifford Chance didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment late Thursday.
The government is represented by Gloria Yi, Julia Heming Segal and Sejal Jhaveri of the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division.
TransPerfect is represented by Martin P. Russo of Kruzhkov Russo PLLC.
The case is U.S. v. Chancery Staffing Solutions LLC et al., case number unknown, in the Office of the Chief Administrative Hearing Officer.
-Additional reporting by Sam Reisman. Editing by Adam LoBelia.
When it comes to corruption in Delaware’s Chancery Court, the public must now assume: where there is smoke, there is fire!
According to a recent complaint in Federal Court, TransPerfect’s #1 competitor was invited to participate in the “auction” — but instead the competitor seems to have used the Chancery’s “airtight” auction process as a massive platform to steal TransPerfect’s trade secrets. So much for the public expectation of Delaware’s Chancellor Bouchard to comply with his sworn duty to protect Delaware companies– APPARENTLY NOT!
Some conspiracies fly under the radar because they are too complicated to garner the appropriate attention, but remember folks, these judges, lawyers, and good old boy Delaware elitists are sophisticated actors — it’s no coincidence that $250 million was spent on lawyers and custodial fees.
Behold the following facts:
1. HIG/Lionbridge is TransPerfect’s #1 competitor.
2. Custodian Pincus of Skadden Arps allowed HIG/Lionbridge unfettered access to hundreds of thousands of corporate documents, including the most guarded secrets of TransPerfect.
3. HIG/Lionbridge is a client of the Skadden law firm.
4. HIG/Lionbridge is a client of Credit Suisse (but abruptly switched sides to “represent” TransPerfect for Pincus).
5. HIG had a loan with Credit Suisse, so IF Credit Suisse could have swung the auction results to HIG/Lionbridge, it would have helped Credit Suisse. They call this a “conflict of interest.”
6. The “conflict of interest” would normally have called for Credit Suisse to resign, but something made them feel protected enough not to resign.
7. Skadden Arps alumni include none other than: Chancellor Andre Bouchard, Custodian Robert Pincus, and Chief Justice Leo Strine (Bouchard’s former intern).
The above information is gleaned from my two years of research in following all the details of this case. If you think I may have the facts wrong, then please read the following link below: publicly available in a New York Supreme Court filing:
https://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/nyscef/ViewDocument?docIndex=qvdJYpXr7_PLUS_7tMrkT9_PLUS_oWMg==
Is all this just coincidence? But folks, we must ask ourselves is the $250 million dollars spent and distributed among Bouchard’s cronies and former business partners (Skadden Arps Law firm) a legitimate situation?
Credit Suisse is also more likely to be paid back on their HIG/Lionbridge debt, if HIG/Lionbridge got a leg up in the competitive market for translation by getting its hands on all of TransPerfect’s trade secrets, including detailed client information, and including decision-makers and price lists.
Perhaps the alleged trade secret theft happened with HIG/Lionbridge acting on their own, but given all these connections, perhaps not. You decide! Please read the article below and send me your feedback. Your comments are welcome and appreciated.
By Pete Brush
Law360, New York (April 15, 2019, 5:47 PM EDT) — TransPerfect Global has sued rival translation company Lionbridge Technologies and private equity firm H.I.G. Capital for $300 million, claiming in Manhattan federal court that they exploited a court-ordered sale of TransPerfect equity to lift trade secrets.
The Thursday lawsuit, pending before U.S. District Judge Denise L. Cote, claims that a unit of Miami-based H.I.G., H.I.G. Middle Market LLC, engaged in “fake bidding” during the $770 million sale of a 50% stake in New York-based TransPerfect to help Massachusetts-headquartered Lionbridge gain an unfair advantage.
“For H.I.G., losing the auction was not a defeat because it was able to accomplish its refocused goal to gain an unfair competitive advantage over [TransPerfect],” the suit says.
H.I.G. and Lionbridge had discussed a go-private deal in 2016 that could have seen the private equity firm take control of both companies and permitted Lionbridge to “solidify its position as the dominant translations services provider worldwide,” the suit says.
H.I.G. completed its acquisition of Lionbridge in early 2017. But, according to the suit, even though TransPerfect co-founder Philip R. Shawe later that year won the auction for the TransPerfect stake, H.I.G. and Lionbridge still profited by gaining access to secrets that were pilfered from what should have been an airtight process mandated by a Delaware business court.
Credit Suisse, which handled the auction and is not a party to the lawsuit, “failed to take meaningful steps to protect the company’s confidential information, and defendants were permitted to freely interview
[TransPerfect’s] management and downloaded [its] top client lists, pricing information, commission schedules, employee files, and sales strategies,” the suit says. The suit adds that Credit Suisse owns Lionbridge debt and was “incentivized” to help H.I.G. shore up that debt.
H.I.G.’s conduct also delayed completion of the sale to Shawe and disrupted the plaintiff’s business, the suit says.
The sale of TransPerfect assets stemmed from a dispute between Shawe and company co-founder Elizabeth Elting over how to run the company that dates to 2014. H.I.G. improperly contacted Elting during the asset auction and assisted her in objecting to the sale to Shawe, the lawsuit says.
Lionbridge continues to use TransPerfect’s proprietary information to compete unfairly, according to the suit. TransPerfect seeks injunctive relief as well as damages, including punitive damages, in excess of $300 million.
Requests for comment from Lionbridge and H.I.G. were not returned. A lawyer representing TransPerfect declined comment. Credit Suisse declined comment.
TransPerfect is represented by Andrew Goodman of Garvey Schubert Barer and Martin Russo and Sarah Khurana of Kruzhkov Russo PLLC.
The case is TransPerfect v. Lionbridge et al., case number 1:19-cv-03283, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
–Editing by Amy Rowe.
Other Skadden Alumni Not (as of now) in Jail? Chancellor Andre Bouchard, Leo Strine, and Robert Pincus; But All Could Face Allegations of Corruption in the TransPerfect Case?
Dear Friends,
Chancellor Andre Bouchard’s former law firm is back in the news!
In my view, there could not be a more obvious pattern of illicit and dishonest behavior among elite members of Bouchard’s gang of judiciary law members. Skadden was recently fined $4.6 million for illicit lobbying efforts by the United States Department of Justice, and that is less than ONE-FIFTH of the king’s ransom that Chancellor Bouchard gave them from TransPerfect’s shareholders and employees. Then again, several employees have told me that Skadden’s representative, Robert Pincus, did attend approximately 12 board meetings for this $26 million. Doing the math, that’s over $2 million PER Board Meeting attended. What a payday Bouchard and Strine gave to their friend Robert Pincus!!!!!!
Mark my words Delaware Democrats, if our legislature doesn’t investigate the TransPerfect case, Chancellor Bouchard could sink Joe Biden’s 2020 presidential bid faster than the Monitor and Merrimack met their watery graves in the Civil War. Biden will have to explain — in my view, Chancellor Bouchard’s illicit activities that threatened 4,000 innocent employees — why he did nothing. Biden being from Delaware could influence a positive correction if he wanted to, but he won’t. The legislature didn’t do enough, but at least they considered a bill that curbed the Chancery’s unchecked power — and voted it out of committee.
Citizens, I implore you: Contact your elected officials and demand an investigation and demand Bouchard’s apparent, sealed document cover-up, come to an end. Don’t let these, in my opinion, suspicious and possibly corrupt Skadden Arps alumni steal Delaware’s future and continue to destroy Delaware’s image.
Please read the “National Law Journal” article below. As always your comments are welcome and appreciated.
Respectfully Submitted,
JUDSON Bennett-Coastal Network
Greg Craig, Former Skadden Partner, Charged With Lying About Ukraine Work
Prosecutors said Craig made false statements and concealed information about his work on a report prepared in 2012 for the Russia-aligned government of Ukraine.
By C. Ryan Barber and Ellis Kim | April 11, 2019 at 02:39 PM
Federal prosecutors on Thursday charged Greg Craig, a former White House counsel for President Barack Obama, with making false statements to the Justice Department in connection with his work for Ukraine as a partner at Skadden, Arps, Meagher, Slate & Flom.
Prosecutors said Craig made false statements and concealed information about his work on a report prepared in 2012 for the Russia-aligned government of Ukraine, on the prosecution of Yulia Tymoshenko, a former prime minister and political rival of the country’s president at the time, Viktor Yanukovych.
Craig’s arraignment is scheduled for Friday afternoon before Magistrate Judge Deborah Robinson. The case has been assigned to Judge Amy Berman Jackson, who has handled several cases brought by Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 election. That includes the conviction of former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort on charges related to his own past lobbying for Ukraine, and former Trump adviser Roger Stone, who has pleaded not guilty to charges of lying to congressional investigators, obstructing justice and tampering with a witness.
With Thursday’s indictment, Craig becomes the first prominent Democrat to face charges linked to Mueller’s investigation. The case also is the first Mueller-related prosecution to come after the conclusion of the special counsel’s investigation.
The Justice Department had previously identified Manafort as the lobbyist who helped Ukraine retain Skadden.
Mueller’s office referred the case to the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York in Manhattan, which did not bring charges. The charges entered Thursday came from federal prosecutors in Washington on the recommendation of the Justice Department’s National Security Division.
The charges come just months after Skadden agreed in January to pay $4.6 million—the equivalent of what the firm received from Ukraine—to resolve claims that it violated the Foreign Agents Registration Act by failing to properly report and disclose that work to the U.S. Justice Department. Without identifying Craig specifically, the Justice Department said in announcing the settlement that a partner at Skadden had made false and misleading statements to the agency’s national security division, causing the U.S. government to conclude the law firm was not obligated to register under FARA. Craig has maintained his innocence, even as his former law firm registered retroactivelyas a foreign agent as part of its January settlement with the Justice Department. Craig retired from Skadden in April 2018.
“This indictment accuses Mr. Craig of misleading the FARA Unit of the Department of Justice in order to avoid registration,” his defense lawyers William Taylor III and William Murphy of Zuckerman Spaeder said in a statement Wednesday. “It is itself unfair and misleading. It ignores uncontroverted evidence to the contrary. Mr. Craig had no interest in misleading the FARA Unit because he had not done anything that required his registration. That is what this trial will be all about.”
In the settlement with Skadden, the Justice Department suggested that Craig misled the national security division’s FARA unit about his contacts with news media ahead of the release of the Tymoshenko report. The Justice Department said Skadden, “in reliance on the lead partner, made false and misleading statements including, among other things, that Skadden provided a copy of the Report only in response to requests from the media and spoke to the media to correct misinformation about the report that the media was already reporting.”
“The firm also submitted documents to the FARA unit that were false,” the Justice Department added. Craig’s lawyers on Wednesday said he had, in fact, refused Ukraine’s requests to participate in the media and lobbying campaign to release the Tymoshenko report. That report, they said, was critical of Tymoshenko’s prosecution and “caused unhappiness” in Ukraine’s Ministry of Justice.
In their Wednesday statement, Craig’s lawyers acknowledged he spoke to reporters at The New York Times but said he did so on his own volition.
“He did this not at the direction or on behalf of Ukraine but to make certain that the Times would accurately summarize the report’s criticisms of the Tymoshenko trial and not rely on misinformation from Ukraine and its representatives,” Craig’s defense team said in a separate statement Wednesday. “He did not lie to his former firm or the government about these conversations. Furthermore, he was told by the FARA unit on Jan. 16, 2014, that he was not required to register under the statute.”
Craig’s attorneys said his underlying role in examining the Tymoshenko prosecution was as “an independent expert on the rule of law, not as an advocate for the client.” They said he and Skadden agreed to work on the report on the condition “that their report would be independent.”
According to Skadden’s FARA registration, Craig was joined on the Ukraine work by Skadden partner Cliff Sloan, whose hourly rate was identified as $1,050. Craig’s rate, according to documents filed in connection with the registration, was $1,150 per hour.
Among the other Skadden lawyers listed in the disclosure was Alexander van der Zwaan, a former associate in the firm’s London office, who pleaded guilty last year to lying to investigators in the special counsel’s office. He was sentenced in April 2018 to 30 days in prison and has since been deported.