Flint Taylor and Jeff Haas, co-founders of the People’s Law Office in Chicago, were the lead lawyers in the landmark case that exposed the FBI’s involvement in the assassination of Black Panthers Fred Hampton and Mark Clark. While that case was settled nearly 40 years ago, newly revealed documents show that the conspiracy to murder Hampton and cover up evidence of government involvement goes deeper than most ever imagined. In this special episode of “Rattling the Bars,” Eddie Conway talks with Taylor and Haas about their decades-long battle for the truth, the government’s continued surveillance and persecution of dissenters, and the ongoing fight for justice and accountability.
Read the transcript for this video: https://therealnews.com/the-governmen…
These two gentlemen have been heroes of mine since graduating from an Illinois liberal arts college in 1969 They are 2 examples of what propelled me to a career as criminal defense attorney Thank you, gentlemen, for all you have done. And thank you, Eddie, for gracing us with their exceptional perspectives–not to mention the hero status you all have in my eyes. My 60’s cohorts and I were already radicalized by the time Fred Hampton was murdered. We witnessed–sometimes in real time–inspiring leaders with vision, integrity, benevolence, charisma, and promise, including JFK, MLK, RFK, get taken out. Seemed like the same set of unscrupulous government actors, whose unchecked grip on power was being threatened had teamed up with crime figures and others facing the same threat, to eliminate such leaders. That conclusion has been repeatedly bolstered with each similar political “elimination” since, including Fred Hampton. Keep fighting for justice.
They hide behind labels and saying government did this is like saying your gun was responsible for the shooting. “Individuals” who were involved need to be held accountable.
We should be teaching our kids about hero’s like these gentlemen.
Cointel pro never ended. It’s name was changed. Look into phoenix, fusion centers, and parallel construction.
We, the undersigned law students and new lawyers, pledge to boycott Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP in response to the firm’s work shielding corporate polluters from climate accountability, its racist legal attacks against Indigenous communities, and the persecution of human rights lawyer Steven Donziger, whose imprisonment is a direct result of Gibson Dunn’s unethical and bullying litigation strategies.
Gibson Dunn has consistently advanced the interests of corporations that cause immense harm to the climate and frontline communities, particularly Indigenous communities. The 2021 Law Firm Climate Change Scorecard by Law Students for Climate Accountability (LSCA) found that Gibson Dunn conducted the second most anti-climate litigation of any law firm. Gibson Dunn has represented Dakota Access despite significant environmental impacts and its incursion on sacred Sioux land, and it currently represents a plaintiff in Brackeen v. Haaland, a lawsuit seeking to strike down the Indian Child Welfare Act, a vital law protecting against the removal of American Indian children from their communities.
Likewise, Gibson Dunn has aggressively litigated to ensure that Chevron evades liability for dumping billions of gallons of toxic waste that did irreversible environmental damage and caused widespread cancer and birth defects among Indigenous and campesino communities in Ecuador. Tens of thousands of Ecuadorians brought suit and were awarded a $9.5 billion dollar judgment to fund cleanup of the pollution; rather than pay it, Chevron has used Gibson Dunn to to demonize Steven Donzinger, the attorney representing these plaintiffs. Gibson Dunn helped mastermind a wholly unprecedented campaign of coercion, bribery, and persecution against Mr. Donziger. For the “crime” of refusing to endanger vulnerable environmental activists in Ecuador by handing over to Chevron years of sensitive communications with his clients, Mr. Donziger was kept under house arrest for two years — an act the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights decried as illegal under international law — and was recently sentenced to six months imprisonment. He surrendered himself on October 27.
These scorched-earth tactics are not new to Gibson Dunn, which has been fined by the Montana Supreme Court for “legal thuggery” and “blatantly and maliciously trying to intimidate” its opponents. A New York federal judge sanctioned the firm for “unacceptable shenanigans,” and a California federal judge found Gibson Dunn’s misconduct to be “a product of a culture which permeates” the firm. But Gibson Dunn’s extraordinary campaign to prevent Indigenous Ecuadorians from receiving relief by attacking Mr. Donziger represents a dangerous escalation of these tactics, and a tremendous threat to all future environmental plaintiffs and their advocates.
Last spring, in a letter signed by 87 law student organizations from dozens of law schools across the country, LSCA called on Gibson Dunn to commit to an ethical standard for its fossil fuel work. These student organizations have yet to receive a response. We reiterate their call.
As the newest generation to enter the legal profession, we refuse to be a part of Gibson Dunn’s work undermining access to justice, particularly for Indigenous communities. And we refuse to contribute to a firm that is doing so much to exacerbate a climate crisis that threatens every one of us with an unlivable future.
The undersigned law students and new lawyers:
Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room is a 2005 documentary film based on the best-selling 2003 book of the same name by Fortune reporters Bethany McLean and Peter Elkind, a study of one of the largest business scandals in American history. About the book:McLean and Elkind are credited as writers of the film alongside the director, Alex Gibney. The film examines the 2001 collapse of the Enron Corporation, which resulted in criminal trials for several of the company’s top executives; it also shows the involvement of the Enron traders in the California electricity crisis. The film features interviews with McLean and Elkind, as well as former Enron executives and employees, stock analysts, reporters and the former Governor of California Gray Davis.The film won the Independent Spirit Award for Best Documentary Feature and was nominated for Best Documentary Feature at the 78th Academy Awards in 2006. The film begins with a profile of Kenneth Lay, who founded Enron in 1985. Two years after its founding, the company becomes embroiled in scandal after two traders begin betting on the oil markets, resulting in suspiciously consistent profits. Enron’s CEO, Louis Borget, is also discovered to be diverting company money to offshore accounts. After auditors uncover their schemes, Lay encourages them to “keep making us millions”. However, the traders are fired after it is revealed that they gambled away Enron’s reserves, nearly destroying the company. After these facts are brought to light, Lay denies having any knowledge of wrongdoing. Lay hires new CEO Jeffrey Skilling, a visionary who joins Enron on the condition that they utilize mark-to-model accounting, allowing the company to book potential profits on certain projects immediately after the deals are signed…whether or not those projects turn out to be successful. This gives Enron the ability to subjectively give the appearance of being a profitable company even if it isn’t. Skilling imposes his Darwinian worldview on Enron by establishing a review committee that grades employees and annually fires the bottom fifteen percent. This creates a highly competitive and brutal working environment.Skilling hires lieutenants who enforce his directives inside Enron, known as the “guys with spikes.” They include J. Clifford Baxter, an intelligent but manic-depressive executive; and Lou Pai, the CEO of Enron Energy Services, who is notorious for using shareholder money to feed his obsessive habit of visiting strip clubs. Pai abruptly resigns from EES with $250 million, soon after selling his stock. Despite the amount of money Pai has made, the divisions he formerly ran lost $1 billion, a fact covered up by Enron. Pai uses his money to buy a large ranch in Colorado, becoming the second-largest landowner in the state.With its success in the bull market brought on by the dot-com bubble, Enron seeks to beguile stock market analysts by meeting their projections. Executives push up their stock prices and then cash in their multi-million dollar options. Enron also mounts a PR campaign to portray itself as profitable and stable, even though its worldwide operations are performing poorly. Elsewhere, Enron attempts to use broadband technology to deliver movies on demand, and “trade weather” like a commodity; both initiatives fail. However, using mark-to-model accounting, Enron records non-existent profits for these ventures.Enron’s successes continue as it became one of the few Internet-related companies to survive the dot-com bubble burst in 2000, and is named as the “most admired” corporation by Fortune magazine for the sixth year running. However, Jim Chanos, an Enron investor, and Bethany McLean, a Fortune reporter, question irregularities about the company’s financial statements and stock value. Skilling responds by calling McLean “unethical”, and accusing Fortune of publishing her reporting to counteract a positive BusinessWeek piece on Enron. Three Enron executives, including CFO Andrew Fastow, meet with McLean and her Fortune editor to explain the company’s finances. Fastow creates a network of shell companies designed solely to do business with Enron, for the ostensible dual purposes of sending Enron money and hiding its increasing debt. However, Fastow has a vested financial stake in these ventures, using them to defraud Enron of tens of millions of dollars. Fastow also takes advantage of the greed of Wall Street investment banks, pressuring them into investing in his shell entities and, in effect, conduct business deals with himself.
In a new interview, Ty Cobb says he doesn’t think Mueller’s investigation is a witch hunt and gives high praise to the Special Counsel.
Donald J. Trump, with his golden towers, his perennial tanned face and his 7th grade vocabulary, is the anti-hero of the elites. He’s the negation of countless hours spent on complicated books, of travelling around the world to attend sophistic conferences, of being proud of their PhDs, of writing hunger-solving children-savings essays. He is the negation of everything that they are.
.. They knew that if Trump won, their rent-free business models would come to an end. They were not concerned with the fate of the country, they were concerned with the fate of their careers. After all, how could they keep distributing their unbounded expertise to the masses when the guy who, according to them didn’t have any, was rewarded with the highest office in the land? How could they sell complicated books and charge high fees to go speak around the country when the guy who was proud of not reading books was made President?
.. This catastrophe, of course, caused pain and disbelief in the heart of the experts. How could they be this wrong? They couldn’t, obviously. Something else must have happened. Something else that was outside of their control. Something nefarious which couldn’t possibly be foreseen nor accounted for in their torrential editorials plastered on the front pages of the New York Times or the Washington Post.
Something, something. Something that could, somehow, incorporate President Trump in their “I’m a very educated and smart person” worldview.
What if Trump actually lost the election? What if there was a glitch in the system, an error, a mistake. That would explain everything.
And so it came. A few days after the election, the exit door from their nightmare materialized, like the sun after a tempest, under the form of an old enemy. An enemy that was operating below the surface, away from the impervious sight of the experts, an enemy sabotaging our democracy from the cold basements of a foreign land. And, just like that, Russia became the scapegoat for all of their shortcomings. As they furiously typed away their new editorials explaining in phantasmagorical details how Russia stole the election for Trump, they realized that hope was still there. Not everything was lost.