How Would A Patriot React?

New York Times best selling author Glenn Greenwald appears to have written a book in an attempt to lecture American patriots on how to act politically when his primary and preferred residence isn't even within the United States - it's actually in Brazil.  Perhaps How Would An Expatriate Act would have been a more fitting title.

Several statements said book's publisher, Working Assets, currently uses to promote the book and author appear to be false. And while Greenwald's Liberal blogging buddies recently lambasted conservative author Ann Coulter for alleged ethical transgressions - lifting copy from her columns for inclusion in her latest book, Godless, it seems as much as ten-percent or more of How Would A Patriot Act was actually "culled" from previously published material on the author's popular blog, Unclaimed Territory, available free to all on the Internet.

He must be a liberal given his apparent fondness for re-cycling.

New York Times best selling author, Glenn Greenwald may also have allowed readers to assume something of an exaggerated perception of his professional credential with a prestigious New York City law firm. That's less clear, but certainly Greenwald can clear it up. Still, once you get beyond Matthew Hale, the high profile case experience associated with Greenwald's public image isn't exactly obvious to even a somewhat more than casual observer. Perhaps that's another item Greenwald will eventually get around to fleshing out.

There is evidence below of a larger effort to prop up both the book and his image as part of an orchestrated campaign to elevate his visibility and status and ensure that his anti-Bush punditry was picked up on by the MSM at a critical time.

Perhaps the above is how an honest and genuine patriot is supposed to act according to Greenwald, but it certainly differs significantly from my view.

On December 15th, 2005, prior to Greenwald beginning work on his book, he posted:

I am currently living most of the time in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (the rest in NYC).

Greenwald re-stated his preference for expatriate life in Brazil after completing work on his book in a May12, 2006 interview with the San Francisco Chronicle:

"Maybe I voted in some local elections," Greenwald said from Brazil, where he spends much of the year with his partner, David, who is Brazilian.

Interesting given that all his PR and the public perception is that he is a working attorney in New York with nothing more than a delinquent license; however, his name no longer appears to be listed as a litigator with the firm Greenwald Christoph. Though his email does somehow manage to Google up Gang Bang Mail Squad, from his email address, gclaw.us doesn't appear to exist.

It's also made clear in the article that Greenwald's image was manufactured by the ideologically driven liberal money machine behind his book's publication, perhaps behind it as much, if not more so, than Greenwald.

"Patriot" is an offspring of Bay Area political activism and technology culture, and the rush to get it into print has a distinct purpose: To foster national debate about the Bush administration's approach to post-Sept. 11 civil liberties, in particular the National Security Agency's domestic surveillance program.

That "Patriot" is coming out next week in a 15th century medium is a calculated decision. Politically, said author Greenwald, it is easier to make a strong, cohesive argument in a book rather than in a three-paragraph burst on a blog. Plus, say marketers connected with the project, having a bound volume with your name on it makes it easier to build credibility with TV reporters and other "mainstream media" types still suspicious of bloggers.

The publishers continue to misstate Greenwald's politics to gain credibility with moderate readers even today on their website:

one man’s transformation from apolitical centrist to citizen activist in defense of our Constitution.

However, the supposedly apolitical centrist certainly didn't appear to be so when quoted extensively as an argumentative gay political activist and leader of an NYU student Gay rights group in the Washington Post circa 1993. The story is about a high-profile Colorado law firm and their ability to recruit at NYU after passage of a state constitutional amendment against gay rights. (Live link to article unavailable, but it can be purchased through the WaPo - I'll quote more extensively than I otherwise would)

The Washington Post (pre-1997 Fulltext) - Washington, D.C. 
Author: Saundra Torry
Date: Aug 23, 1993

Perhaps the squabble at New York University started because Arnold & Porter has a 14-lawyer office in Denver. Or because most Colorado voters are conservative. Or because most NYU law professors aren't...

Gay rights student activists argue that Arnold & Porter, which has been invited under the exception, really doesn't qualify for it. Schools officials have engaged in "intrigue and deception" to mollify the prominent firm, said law student Glenn Greenwald of the school's Lesbian and Gay Students group.

As of Friday, Arnold & Porter was planning to show up on the NYU campus this week to woo bright, young lawyers-to-be, including those with their eye on Denver.

And Greenwald and his group were readying a welcome. "We intend to have an aggressive and meaningful protest commensurate with how objectionable we believe their inclusion is," Greenwald promised.

In laymen's terms, they're angry and plan to demonstrate against the law firm and their school.

Last November, 53 percent of Colorado voters passed an amendment that would ban state and local laws that prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation. The amendment set off an outcry from national gay rights organizations and triggered a nationwide boycott of Colorado as a convention site.

Last spring, the issue erupted on the NYU law campus when the Lesbian and Gay Students began pressing for a policy to show that the law school "will not promote the commerce and economic prosperity of a state which, by constitutional amendment, discriminates," Greenwald said.

But Greenwald and his group were not impressed. "We knew they had one partner ... spending some amount of time against Amendment 2," Greenwald said. "That does not represent an institutional commitment" to overturn it.

Greenwald argues that if Arnold & Porter did work against the amendment, it seems they'd be "proud to talk about it."

I've no problem with Greenwald's position, it's the manufacture of him as an apolitical centrist which I would point out. And as for the re-purposing of content from his public blog to get out a book, I'll simply defer to Greenwald himself:

More than 200 readers volunteered to help him with research; he chose five. Over the next six weeks, he wrote 225 pages. Only about 10 percent of the content was culled from the blog, he estimated.

The publicity for the book also attempts to hold up Greenwald's alleged moderate tone as a reason for his anti-Bush rhetoric to be taken so seriously.

Greenwald, 39, stood out among the bloggers she found, said Nix, who lives in Sausalito. He's measured and is not a name-caller.

But the truth is, in January of 2006, adoring Greenwald fans were applauding him for his character assassination of conservatives prior to his being plucked up from, perhaps the unemployed expatriate lawyers line, to write a book.

Read more of Greenwald's character assassination of these two clowns. They want to give it out, they can get it back. Greenwald is on point.

The irony is that, not only was Greenwald attacking pundits at the NRO, he also smeared the very prestigious law firm he points to on his resume as evidence of his legal bona fides:

Thursday, January 19, 2006
National Review's new blog -- A vile case study in GOP filth-peddling

National Review has created a museum dedicated to the Republican political gutter of the 1990s in the form of a new blog hosted by two of the trashy lowlifes who worked during the entire Clinton Presidency to turn our national political dialogue into one big Jerry Springer Show. The authors of the blog are George Conway III and his lovely wife, Kellyanne

This is the filth out of which the Conway couple emerged, and in which, along with so many self-righteous Bush-loving moralists, they continue to wallow.

Since the early-1990s, George Conway has been a partner at the prominent Manhattan law firm Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz, where he worked with rejected Bush judicial nominee Miguel Estrada (I was an Associate at that firm for a couple of years after law school in the mid-1990s but had minimal personal interaction with Conway and, to my recollection, none with Estrada)

Some tempered rhetoric, wouldn't you agree? But what about those years at the prestigious law firm? Well, there is this from a comment posted on my blog said to be from a Greenwald email.

I worked at Wachtell, Lipton as a Summer Associate after my second year at NYU, as a pre-Bar Associate during my entire third year at NYU and once I graduated, and then as a practicing Litigation Associate once I was admitted to the New York Bar.

Anyone who says that I did not practice law there after I passed the bar is lying -- and deliberately so, I would think, since nobody who says such a thing could possibly have any basis for knowing that.

It's unclear how many hours he did enjoy being the legal equivalent of an intern at Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz (WLRK). But Greenwald is wrong, again, as there is a basis for knowing, assuming Greenwald wishes to sign a waiver. That's all that would be required, according to my discussions with WLRK.

In any event, nothing at all appears for Glenn Greenwald through FindLaw, though I realize he was active and a record exists somewhere. But given this, what appears to be an official record with dates as recent as 2002, his WLRK relationship is listed as only running from 1994 - 1995 - 1995 being the same year he passed the bar. That would more or less jibe with his having been there as an intern and never having been taken on as an actual Associate, or only lasting a relatively short period of time. Quite honestly, I'm not sure.

Glenn Greenwald, (Member) born New York, N.Y., March 6, 1967; admitted to bar, 1995, New York, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York; 1996, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of New York; 1998, U.S. Court of Appeals, Second Circuit; 2002, U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit. Education: George Washington University (B.A., 1990); New York University School of Law (J.D., 1994). Member, New York University Law Review, 1992-1993. Recipient, American Jurisprudence Awards, Civil Procedure, Contracts and Property. Associate, Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz, 1994-1995.

Greenwald didn't pass the bar until 1995. His actual time as a genuine Associate at WLRK, if any, doesn't appear to be too much - and if the above is correct, certainly not the several years currently claimed on his wiki.

He worked for several years for the large New York law firm of Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz, then co-founded the law firm of Greenwald Christoph. He litigated several cases with significant constitutional issues

It is possible that Greenwald did spend several years as an Associate at WLRK. But given what appear to be major inconsistencies between the Glenn Greenwald we've been told of and the one who actually exists, it isn't far fetched to suggest everything should be in question when it comes to Greenwald. His blog is entitled Unclaimed Territory and it seems as though relevant, significant elements of his past and present may be as yet unclaimed in the public eye, as well.

No serious scholarly publications on the Constitution authored by Greenwald were uncovered during an academic search, though some have started to refer to him as a Constitutional Law expert. Based upon what, is far from clear.

Ultimately, in terms of weighing in as an allegedly objective political pundit and lecturing patriots on how to act politically in America, it might serve Greenwald if he actually started hanging around, if not actually in the country a little more. I'd argue an individuals actual experience, what country they reside in most of the year and how capable they are of being candid are factors to be taken into account when reading any pundit - assuming some actually do wade through his turgid prose.

Were I a patriot who plunked down two bits for his best selling book, I might be angry. Fortunately, I'm a patriot but no fool. The larger issue may be that if Greenwald is little more than an ever-increasingly shrill scam, what damage will he do to blogging on the Left - and possibly even on the Right in the end?

And that should tick every genuinely patriotic blogger off, regardless of their respective political views.

In conclusion, lately several liberal bloggers have been making the case that the MSM has been unfriendly to them, while giving conservative bloggers a pass. I disagree. But I would suggest that if that stop carelessly elevating star gazing stock manipulators to political strategists and resisted the temptation to enlist expatriates to write books lecturing Americans on patriotism, perhaps the MSM might start cutting them some perceived break.

Lord knows they're certainly liberal enough to feel your pain.

Pardon the editorializing. It's simply how this particular patriot chose to act.

Comments

[rhodeymark]

So Dan - I know it's early but I am interested to see your results in the GG sock puppet derby. "Sam Mathews" needs his integrity upheld!

[brenda banks]

so you work for bush/rove?
pfffffft.
cant you really find somewhere gleen lied?
hunt real hard now.
you sure arent there yet.
repugs are all sick and i am sure i wont ever vote for one of them again after this 5 years of deceit to the utmost.
br3n (ex repug and proud democrat now)

[don surber]

Good post.

In defense of Coulter and Greenwald, the recycling of one's own copy is to be encouraged. Think of columns and posts on a blog as rough drafts. I know you only brought it up to show G had done what he charged C with doing. Whenever I get around to writing that book, you betcha I'll recycle my old stuff. There is my essay on snails from fourth grade ...

[BumperStickerist]

Nice summation -

a couple of quick points,

--- by the way, this is a case where Glenn Greenwald is being 'Swift Boated'. He overstated his case and is being called on it. The issues isn't 'whether Glenn worked at Wachtell' the issue is what to make of it. ----

A question that WLRK might be able to answer is whether they have a probationary period for newly hired Litigation Associates. If they do, you can get a sense of whether Glenn made it through that probationary period.

After Wachtell Glenn's first go around with establishing a law practice involved a guy named 'Holland'

If you look at Greenwald's listing you'll see that there are three attorneys, Greenwald, Christoph and Holland.

The record for Holland showed that he was older, in his mid 40s based on grad dates, at the time time the firm was established. Going from memory, Holland was also the senior partner / attorney of record.

That matters to the extent that Glenn may have been a junior partner at the G,C&H firm rather than, as he seems to want you to believe, The Guy.

Fwiw, if you read through the Hale stuff Glenn did prevail on a couple of issues regarding the tax status of the World Church and some evidentiary matters.

.

[splashtc]

The fungus amoung us. Oprah should have him on.

[Ed]

Dan,

So I assume that your private, public and sexual life is now open to investigation since you've chosen this avenue to refute Greenwald's arguments?

And when did you stop being a pedophile?

[B.C.]

Dan, great expose' on The Enlightened Gwendolyn.

"br3n", we Eeeevil Rethuglicans are quite relieved that you're a "proud democrat" these days. (We know you always have been a Donk, too, BTW. Pretending to have "seen the light" is exactly the kind of horseshi'ite that "center-leftist-turned-neo-Che Gwendolyn" has been caught doing.) We're sort of fond of having people on our side who know how to properly structure a sentence/paragraph and can actually use the "Shift" key.

Also, hon, put the bong down. It'll make it easier to swipe your welfare debit card and punch in the PIN without spilling bong water on the six piglets orbiting your flip-flop festooned feet. Just trying to be helpufl.

Ed, have you stopped having sex with underaged sheep?

[B.C.]

Dammit! *helpful*--- PIMF and it STILL slipped through. :P

[BumperStickerist]

So I assume that your private, public and sexual life is now open to investigation since you've chosen this avenue to refute Greenwald's arguments?

If Dan Riehl and his supporters claimed that his work as {insert occupation with strict licensing} qualified him as an expert in the field and that information didn't parse, you bet.

The 'sex life' thing with Greenwald, btw, isn't Gannonesque or even salacious. Personally, I don't care whether Greenwald is gay.

However, the issue of Glenn's sexual preference is relevant IN THE CONTEXT of lawsuits that Glenn filed regarding his and his partner's behalf (it goes to that whole 'Constitutional Scholar' thing) and, further, Glenn's subsequent attempt to have information regarding that lawsuit sealed.

Also, Glenn and his publisher claim that Glenn was apolitical. Sure, Glenn might *consider himself* apolitical, but that's sort of like Andrew Sullivan considering himself Catholic - the Pope might have something to say about that.

Looking at Greenwald's public activities during and after law school, how on Earth does that manage a description of 'apolitical'.

Call it what it is, a marketing ploy.

[B.C.]

Bumperstickerist, spot on.

[camanintx]

Glenn points out the hypocrisy of right wing blogs and you respond by swift-boating him. I guess he hit a raw nerve.

[Sharkman]

"Swiftboating him" being defined, of course, as "telling the truth about him", just as the Swift Boat Vets told the truth about Kerry. Ouch!

[Established technology company]

Look, I hate to swoop in here like a stereotypical liberal East Coast elitist and call all you fine, upstanding, heartland-loving patriots unsophisticated rubes, but you don't leave me much of a choice. Your attempt to belittle Greenwald's background is at once comical and pathetic. Perhaps, Dan, you haven't had much experience with corporate lawyers in your current role with an "established technology company" (ha! Let's see Greenwald get a gig like that!), but I work for a big white-shoe firm, and it is common knowledge in our business that Wachtell is the absolute cream of the crop - the most prestigious, highest-paying firm in New York. Summer associate positions there are considered the ultimate prize at the very best law schools, and are only offered to truly exceptional students.

But hey, wouldn't you rather read what "a marketing and sales manager at an established technology company" has to say about matters of constitutional law? I know I would!

[Mikey NTH]

If by 'swift-boating' you mean pointing out his little hypocrisies and liberties with truth, camanintx, then you are spot on.

Or in other words:
Goose.
Gander.
Sauce.
Some Assembly Required.

[Dan]

the most prestigious, highest-paying firm in New York

Precisely. And after, or soon after his "internship" it appears your boy from Brazil was selected NOT! LMAO You elitist idiots crack me up. Hey, if you'd rather read a poseur who couldn't find his way around a serious high profile 1st amendment case simply because they once had an internship at a law firm, go for it. That's precisely what keeps libs looking stupid and being out of power.

[Dan]

about matters of constitutional law

Oh, BTW white shoes - you simply don't get blogging. Unlike BabaLouie Glenn, I don't represent myself as a constitutional scholar, or attempt to weigh in as one. I can link a legitimate source if such an issue is pertinent to a post. Point being, Greenwald isn't a legitimate source in the context of his relative lack of accomplishment as compared to several other blogging lawyers. Or does he lend his IP to Larry Tribe for posting, too? Obviously he's intent on constantly attacking Reynolds out of pure jealousy over his success in blogging, holding a job, MSM cites, etc... Your boy is as transparent as the day is long.

ha ha Too freaking funny a day, this one.

[Established technology company]

Thanks for reminding me, Dan (and for resurrecting "not!" - haven't heard that one since 1993! Was 'Wayne's World 2' on cable recently?)! I was going to point out the foolishness of your initial "intern" remark, but assumed it was self-evident - apparently not. You clearly have no clue as to how the legal hiring process works, although (unsurprisingly) this hasn't stopped you from definitively concluding that Greenwald is a sham.

The point of my last comment, which you apparently missed, was that to even be offered a summer associate position at Wachtell is a remarkable achievement. Only the very best students at a handful of top schools (usually Yale, Harvard, Columbia and NYU) get offers from Wachtell. To excel at those schools, one needs to demonstrate exceptional legal reasoning - the kind that doesn't disappear as soon as you choose to leave a high-profile firm.

A summer associate position is not an "internship"; it's a job offer, and you have to screw up pretty severely not to be invited back after graduating (and I do mean severely - Google 'Jonas Blank' if you don't believe me). Getting the offer is the true hurdle, and once you're over it you're pretty much set. Firms don't 'select' from among their summer associates, nor do they 'select' from among their pre-Bar associates - if you have the job, you have the job. The weeding out doesn't occur until several years down the road, when people start jockeying for partnerships. It's entirely typical for recent law school graduates to do what Greenwald did: work for several years at a big-name, big-money firm to get your law school debts in order and put a prestigious name on your resume, then strike out on your own. This is the normal trajectory of a legal career, not a sign of some sort of failure (which you seem to be implying).

But hey, wouldn't you rather hear what a former "employee of a mid-sized weekly newspaper" has to say about a lawyer's qualifications? I know I would!

[observer 5]

Really, so what? Who give a FF what an "associate" is? Wowwww, you really got him.

Greenwald has more courage in his little finger than the whole chickenhawk, "save me, Bush" crowd has.

He is a true American defending the truest American value - the Constitution. His opponents would sell out the Consitution and allow a dictatorship, they are so afraid for their punk-asses.

[LM]

Well, I'm a lawyer, and I've worked at two major white shoe firms in NYC, including as a summer associate. "Established technology company" (what a moniker) is correct that Wachtell is indeed one of the top firms, but Wachtell is famous for corporate mergers & acquisitions specifically -- Marty Lipton was THE dean of this field -- and not particularly well-known for Supreme Court practice. (Cahill is the First Amendment shop, and many, many other firms do a heck of a lot of Supreme Court work. Wachtell does not stand out in this area.) Wachtell is considered more of a corporate (transactional or deal-making) shop than a litigation shop, although I'm sure the litigation practice is quite good. You do have to be an excellent student to get a summer associate offer from Wachtell, but an offer to be a summer associate is absolutely NOT a job offer, which comes at the end of the summer, assuming you pass muster. A comparison of a summer associate to an intern is not preposterous -- summer associates are NOT members of the bar, they cannot legally practice law, they sign themselves as "clerks" or something similar, and the work they do is rather like glorified interning. Every summer, the real lawyers scramble to "make work" for summer associates on their cases. The summers also go out to lunch a great deal, and to the theater, on the firm's dime. In addition, Riehl makes a good point when he questions just how long Greenwald was at Wachtell. Greenwald isn't very specific (naturally) but looking at the various quotes it looks as if Greenwald was only there for a few months after passing the bar, while trying to create the impression that he had been there for much longer. HOWEVER, it doesn't matter. As a summer associate, a pre-bar associate (actually just a 3rd year law student working part time) and a junior associate, he wouldn't have played a very important role in any case at all. He would have done a lot of research and writing, and document review and production, and supervision of paralegals, but NO decision-making or strategizing whatsoever. So if he worked on cases of constitutional import, then it was only as a dogsbody, which is what junior associates are. If in the course of such work he has managed to transform himself into a Constitutional scholar, then good for him -- he should name the cases he worked on (perfectly permissible if they are in fact real cases, ie filed in court) and what he did on them, or point to the law review articles he's authored on constitutional issues.

[Iceman]

"A summer associate position is not an "internship"; it's a job offer, and you have to screw up pretty severely not to be invited back after graduating (and I do mean severely - Google 'Jonas Blank' if you don't believe me)."

I attended a top law school, and I've only heard of five people who did not get a job offer after their summer associate program:

-A girl who got drunk at a firm event in the South Street Seaport, fell in the water and had to be hospitalized.

-A 6'4" girl who asked a partner if he ever fantasized about sex with a tall woman, and who wrote a letter to the New York Observer on behalf of her firm with no authorization to do so.

-A guy who was a superstar at an Ivy League law school who was an intern at a crappy mid-sized Philadelphia firm, and the guy wanted to talk about theories of legal interpretation and constitutional issues when all the other lawyers would talk about sports and TV shows.

-Tucker Max (read the story on tuckermax.com about the "charity auction")

-Jonas Blank

[Jack Roy]

Third NYC lawyer jumping in: LM makes some valid points but it's hard to see to what end.

Yes, Wachtell's crown jewel was their M&A practice, and the best litigation firm in the universe isn't Wachtell or even Cravath, it's Paul Weiss; the best appellate firm is probably Jones Day; and the best 1st Amendment firm is Floyd Abrams... er, Cahill.

That said, what LM and every other New York lawyer knows, and for that matter any reasonably ambitious law student at a top 10 school---Wachtell is still the greatest law firm in the universe, or whatever hyperbole you want.

And yes, the comparison between summer associates and interns isn't preposterous, exactly, but it's a little odd as to law firms generally, and as to Wachtell it's not reflective of reality. Many firms, mine included, give the summers more liquor than work. Wachtell, by unanimous report of my friends who summered there, isn't like that.

Adding this all up I'm hard-pressed to try and decipher what LM is trying to show. As to First Amendment issues, Glenn Greenwald surely isn't Gerry Gunther. Sure, you could only credit those thoughts on constitutional law that come from the authors of multiple articles in the Harv. L. Rev., and if you were to do so, you'd be engaging in a very high level of discourse and would be a thoughtful, considered person. Needless to say, that is not the path the blogosphere has taken.

But that's not the discussion we're having when Riehl implies that Greenwald's some piddling hack. Greenwald's a former Wachtell associate, and despite the earnest efforts of our blogger friend, that credential speaks for itself. Any New York lawyer can tell you it's an impressive achievement, even if you leave after a year and a half (or however long it was). As for whether his arguments are valid or deserve consideration---a point Mr. Riehl has curiously ignored---I think you have to read what he's written to determine that.

[Jack Roy]

Iceman, Jonas Blank did, in fact, get the offer. So did the drunk girl, if I recall correctly (and I had thought it was into the Hudson, not the East River, but no matter).

[whois]

Hey Riehl, killer 'investigative' work. Really impressive stuff. I want to make sure I got this:

Glenn is gay.
Glenn spends time in Brazil.
Glenn reuses ~10% of his own content in his book (which makes him inherently liberal).
Glenn's legal background is not fully understood.

Gosh, I'd say that pretty much invalidates everything he's ever said.

Sorry to be the one to tell you, but typing a domain name in your browser is not the definitive means of determining if said domain name is in use. There's this thing called a 'whois' lookup. But you seem awfully smart/thorough in your character bashing ability, so I'm sure in the future you will learn to command the whois registry, which with 10 seconds time would have given you this:

Registrant Name: GLENN GREENWALD
Registrant Organization: GREENWALD CHRISTOPH, P.C.

What is the obsession with Greenwald bashing? He's really getting to you, isn't he? Really getting under your skin. It's so apparent. The best part is that you don't have the intelligence to engage in an actual debate, so you resort to this screeching peice of 'investigative' nonsense, sans substance. 100% Pathetic-loser-whining. You bring nothing to the table, Riehl.

[Established technology company]

observer 5 -

That's harsh, homes. We're fighting the same fight here! Show love!

[Dan]

I want to make sure I got this

Try reading more slowly if you're having trouble. The argument's over. It isn't about his education or his intelligence, it's about his lying to create an image which didn't exist. Not impugning what does. But I forgot, fanatics aren't interested in the truth, only in being told what they want to believe. Ultimately Greenwald is insignificant - and if you know anything about this, you should know that.

Rosenberg, Stern, etc ... they're the people that matter to me. They can actually make things happen, all Greenwald can do is get payed to show up.

[Dan]

That's harsh, homes.

LMAO That's sad. It's "holme's" my incredibly well-educated, erudite litigating friend. If you wanna play street, at least have a clue what it is, so you don't look like a dope. ha ha ha

[jody ranck]

this post and related comments are nothing but drivel

[Rick]

This fuss over GiGi's CV and what it purports is rather beside the point.

Greenwald's supporters (his "cultists?") wish to pump up his credentials, yet if credentials are trump, his target--Chimpy Bushhitler--has him beat hands down. And after all, Emperor Shrubya's alleged AWOL time--his presumptive low point in life--was about the same duration as Greenwald's apprenticeship on the white-shoe firm's photocopier, Greenwald's zenith.

Cordially...

[BumperStickerist]

well, I gave major props to Greenwald for his selection by Wachtell in my comments in the previous posts. Not as major as the props Greenwald gives himself, apparently, but no matter. So I'm not going down the 'Greenwald is a hack' road.

The problem (for me) is Greenwald's basis for his and his publisher's claims about his legal scholarship. By his own admission, Greenwald worked at Wachtell for at most, two years. He spent about 3/4s (possibly more) of that time prior to passing the Bar. He then took a somewhat different path to a small three person shop, the senior partner (Holland) left a while later, after the Hale case. IIRC, Glenn's law license has lapsed. So, much as the 'Glenn is a hack' commentary is offbase, so is the "Glenn is a terrific lawyer" if that opinion is based solely on the fact that Glenn was selected by Wachtell back in 1993, as a 2nd year intern.

I agree with Jack Roy's comment that Greenwald's writings should be what's judged. It's just that Greenwald seeks to prevent people from judging his writings by claiming that he's the one being judged. So, what to do?

Personally, as a rightwing rethuglican Bush Kultist, I don't mind Greenwald acting as the legal analyst for the Left-side of the blogosphere. Think about it, would any of you lawyer types mind it if Greenwald showed up as the opposing counsel?

.

[Gary Maxwell]

OK

So where is my apology from the jerk who came on here and started to call me names like "pedantic" cuz I was expressing skepticism about the Wachtell stuff. I dont rember the name but it was a alphabet soup type pseudonym something like rzylik. So it does appear that the time at the firm was mostly unpaid internship and left right after passing the bar. Never anything more than an Associate duirng that rather brief time. OK. I wont get the apology but thanks Dan for digging this out. My sniffer said it was fishy and I should have looked a little deeper and maybe I would have found this too.

[Yomama]

Proud democrat ? ha ha ha..and it shows. You can't even spell.
typical !! IDIOT.

-----
so you work for bush/rove?
pfffffft.
cant you really find somewhere gleen lied?
hunt real hard now.
you sure arent there yet.
repugs are all sick and i am sure i wont ever vote for one of them again after this 5 years of deceit to the utmost.
br3n (ex repug and proud democrat now)

Posted by: brenda banks | Thursday, July 20, 2006 at 07:59 AM

[Rick]

Yomama,

I think Brenda switched to the Democrats (sure, sure she did, being all idealistic and everything) because she flunked the 'pubbies harsh, disparate-impacting entrance exam: spell "G.O.P."

Cordially...

[dgbellak]

"...gclaw.us doesn't appear to exist."

A stunning display of deductive powers. It's amazing the man ever receives e-mail.

gclaw.us is resolved to 204.244.36.219. It's relative location is through a Canadian ISP. It is hosted by Apollo Hosting. According to whois:

Domain Name: GCLAW.US
Domain ID: D2897191-US
Sponsoring Registrar: TUCOWS INC.
Domain Status: clientTransferProhibited
Domain Status: clientUpdateProhibited
Registrant ID: TU0IMRQ1CITN70VJ
Registrant Name: GLENN GREENWALD
Registrant Organization: GREENWALD CHRISTOPH, P.C.
Registrant Address1: 810 SEVENTH AVENUE 10TH FLOOR
Registrant City: NEW YORK
Registrant State/Province: NY
Registrant Postal Code: 10019
Registrant Country: United States
Registrant Country Code: US
Registrant Phone Number: +1.2124896359
Registrant Email: brianchannyc@aol.com
Registrant Application Purpose: P1
Registrant Nexus Category: C11
Administrative Contact ID: TU0IMRQ1CITN70VJ
Administrative Contact Name: GLENN GREENWALD
Administrative Contact Organization: GREENWALD CHRISTOPH, P.C.
Administrative Contact Address1: 810 SEVENTH AVENUE 10TH FLOOR
Administrative Contact City: NEW YORK
Administrative Contact State/Province: NY
Administrative Contact Postal Code: 10019
Administrative Contact Country: United States
Administrative Contact Country Code: US
Administrative Contact Phone Number: +1.2124896359
Administrative Contact Email: brianchannyc@aol.com
Administrative Contact Application Purpose: P1
Administrative Contact Nexus Category: C11
Billing Contact ID: TU0IMRQ1CITN70VJ
Billing Contact Name: GLENN GREENWALD
Billing Contact Organization: GREENWALD CHRISTOPH, P.C.
Billing Contact Address1: 810 SEVENTH AVENUE 10TH FLOOR
Billing Contact City: NEW YORK
Billing Contact State/Province: NY
Billing Contact Postal Code: 10019
Billing Contact Country: United States
Billing Contact Country Code: US
Billing Contact Phone Number: +1.2124896359
Billing Contact Email: brianchannyc@aol.com
Billing Contact Application Purpose: P1
Billing Contact Nexus Category: C11
Technical Contact ID: TUSMTWCYII22LML6
Technical Contact Name: GoBIGmedia Technical Services
Technical Contact Organization: GoBIGmedia.com
Technical Contact Address1: 157 Adelaide Street West Suite 195
Technical Contact City: Toronto
Technical Contact State/Province: Ontario
Technical Contact Postal Code: M5H4E7
Technical Contact Country: Canada
Technical Contact Country Code: CA
Technical Contact Phone Number: +1.7147833137
Technical Contact Facsimile Number: +1.7147833145
Technical Contact Email: domains@gobigmedia.com
Technical Application Purpose: P1
Technical Nexus Category: C11
Name Server: NS2.GOBIGMEDIA.NET
Name Server: NS3.GOBIGMEDIA.NET
Created by Registrar: TUCOWS INC.
Last Updated by Registrar: TUCOWS INC.
Domain Registration Date: Wed Oct 02 15:47:41 GMT 2002
Domain Expiration Date: Mon Oct 01 23:59:59 GMT 2007
Domain Last Updated Date: Sun Sep 25 17:51:20 GMT 2005
WesTel Telecommunications WESTNETBLK (NET-204-244-0-0-1)
204.244.0.0 - 204.244.255.255
HyperStreet.com 204-244-36-208-04357 (NET-204-244-36-208-1)
204.244.36.208 - 204.244.36.223

Hmm. Doesn't appear to exist at all. All you seem to be saying is that there is no GC-related page at gclaw.us, though I'm not sure what this proves.

[Gary Maxwell]

Dgbellak

Wow that was a powerful argument. You must think you have really hung one on the chin of Dan. Are you strutting around and high fiving strangers at the moment?

Did you think to call the phone number listed for the law firm of GC PC ( and the registrant you found with Whois)? somehow I dont think you did. Now the phone number is listed there in three different lines and its exactly the same phone number. But if you call it the phone company says " we're sorry the phone number is not inservice."

Well?

[Xrlq]

Here's what Greenwald's brief tenure at Wachtell proves: he attended a top-tier law school, and his first-year law school grades were excellent. It says just essentially nothing about his accomplishments since.

[Xrlq]

"just essentially" = just "essentially"

[I R A Darth Aggie]

dgbellak

Your point would be? perhaps you should dig a bit deeper. You wouldn't actually find anything, if you had. It's a registered domain, yes. There are lots of those. It also appears to be parked. No valid MX record, tho. Ok, and the billing contact has an AOL address.

Looks like a vanity domain, or someone has plans in the future for its use. But it doesn't appear to be particularly useful, except to Tucows, GoBigMedia, WestTel and Hyperstreet. They make some coin on the deal.

[ray butler]

I see nothing but ad hominem attacks here. You Right Wingers should really look before you leap on top of the bandwagon.

http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/

Response to right-wing personal attacks
As I've noted several times in the last couple of weeks, my focus on the lawlessness, extremist rhetoric and violence-inciting tactics of the Bush movement and its followers in the blogosphere has triggered a slew of posts on multiple blogs devoted to childish ad hominem attacks, efforts to investigate my personal and professional background, and all sorts of wild accusations of every type, aimed at everything from my bar status to my sexual orientation to where I spend my time.

Numerous blogs have made such posts literally their primary topic for more than a week. Many of the most repeated claims are just factually false, while others are petty and adolescent. But because the principal targets of my arguments -- such as Instapundit and Little Green Footballs -- have taken to promoting virtually every post which contains such attacks, no matter how juvenile or false, they continue to be churned out by attention-seeking bloggers, and the attacks have received relatively wide dissemination.

[Rick]

Ray,

So, the Great Man hath Spoken. But he didn't say anything. What *is* your point? The ridicule GiGi is receiving for his employment of sock-puppets (Truth to Greenwaldian "Power") is hardly ad hominem. Juvenile, sure...just like GiGi's Important Thoughts on "Bush Cultists."

But those were demolished weeks and weeks ago; this is a new hobby.

Cordially...