To Beat Lawyers, Think Like a Stinker

Letter to Ephesians: No. 47 went for the “kill shot” with lib lawyers that worked with Dems to defame him with mounds of fake evidence. But banning them from ALL gov’t work was too easy for judges to call illegal. Was limiting their biz with 1K cuts, as they did, a better idea?

The WSJ op ed suggested it’d agree with the over kill view in “Big Law Firms 3, Trump 0.” It pointed to how “three judges across the political spectrum (i.e., conservatives as well as liberals) have now said the President’s punitive executive orders are unconstitutional.” Not that Trump isn’t “sometimes right” about judicial overreach, the editors conceded, but he can’t ignore the “latest forceful rebuke ... from federal Judge Richard Leon, a conservative nominated by George W. Bush. His 73-page opinion is a scorcher concluding that Mr. Trump’s EO against the WilmerHale law firm ‘must be struck down in its entirety unconstitutional” as envisioned by the “Founding Fathers.”

Arguably, the first mistake was in issuing EOs naming names aka targeting the stinkers. The second, as noted above, was banning them from even entering federal buildings. I worked over 17 years for three of the USA’s biggest international law firms, two of which were Democratic to the bone, and there is no way to legally cut them out of their Swamp altogether. Yet, a president had plenty of weapons to surgically give the stinkers within a taste of their own medicine. For one, lawyers & their law firms are not immune from defamation lawsuits & Mr. Trump has shown how effective THAT can be against the MSM. Nor are lawyers shielded from criminal investigations as well as prosecutions where warranted and as DOJ is reportedly pursuing. If there’s one thing these law firms hate is defending themselves and spending gads of money in doing so ... rather than bilking the US taxpayers for their outrageous hourly billings.

Davd Soul