Just when you thought Scott Brown was a wuss

 He takes Elizabeth”Fauxhontas”Warren and swings a Cluebat™ at warp 7 speed and connects with devastation in the 9.0 range.

 via Legal Insurrection:

Elizabeth Warren’s law license problem

Maintained private law practice at Cambridge office for over a decade but not licensed in Massachusetts

The debate last Thursday night between Scott Brown and Elizabeth Warren covered ground mostly known to voters.  But there was one subject most people watching probably did not know about, Elizabeth Warren’s private legal representation of The Travelers Insurance Company in an asbestos-related case.  Brown brought the point up late in the debate, and hammered it:

 Warren attempted to deny her role, and referred to a Boston Globe article, but the Globe article supports Brown’s account. The Globe article indicated the representation was for a period of three years and Warren was paid $212,000. The case resulted in a Supreme Court victory for Travelers arising out of a bankruptcy case in New York.

Whatever the political implications of the exchange, Warren’s representation of Travelers raises another big potential problem for Warren.

Warren represented not just Travelers, but numerous other companies starting in the late 1990s working out of and using her Harvard Law School office in Cambridge, which she listed as her office of record on briefs filed with various courts. Warren, however, never has been licensed to practice law in Massachusetts. (emp. mine)

First rule of holes…when you can’t get out, quit digging…unless your a Liberal, then get a backhoe.

10
Leave a Reply

Please Login to comment
10 Comment threads
0 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
10 Comment authors
MrSpkrLC TerribleTroyBruce in NHMatthias the Triceratopsreaderjp Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
lc purple raider
lc purple raider

The Un-lawyer!

angrywebmaster
angrywebmaster

She’s a member of the Progressive Liberal Elite and as such, the rules don’t apply to her, only those dirty little people. :em07:

LC SecondMouse
LC SecondMouse

LC Light: not just Pow, but PowWow!

Maybe she is 1/32 licensed to practice law. Or she remembers stories about her being licensed to practice law while she was growing up.

Mark12A
Mark12A

He’s probably a racist for pointing that out.

LC Roguetek
LC Roguetek

I have ten bucks that says she’ll never be prosecuted, censored, or otherwise punished for this.

readerjp
readerjp

She will say that she passed under the Native American bar. She’s a Cherokee lawyer.

Did she do something illegal?

Matthias the Triceratops
Matthias the Triceratops

She’ll never get prosecuted for this, being a big shot liberal, but yeah, Sen. Scott Brown (R-MA) definitely scored one on her. His entire thrust in that debate was that Fauxcahontas cannot be trusted as a public servant because she has repeatedly lied to benefit herself. And he’s got excellent evidence to demonstrate it too. Another great liberal hack to… Read more »

Bruce in NH
Bruce in NH

At the rate she’s going, she’ll also be a Vietnam vet and the inventor of the non-stick frying pan by the time the next debate rolls around.

LC TerribleTroy
LC TerribleTroy

I wonder what the impact (if any) of a non-credentialed “attorney” fileing briefs, motions etc. has on the cases she worked on? While prosecution may or may not occur, any bets on when the civil litigation begins? It would be a good thing if she were to lose the election and then be disbarred. She is obviously “ethically challenged.”I wish… Read more »

MrSpkr
MrSpkr

Ewww. State Bar Disciplinary groups, even in liberal places like Illinois and Massachusetts, typically take a very dim view of barratry. I suspect that somebody has already filed the appropriate paperwork with the Massachusetts Bar. If she’s not licensed now, I doubt she will be any time soon — the typically period you have to wait before applying for reinstatement… Read more »