Wilson Fu

They interview one of their reporters and call it news.  WTFreak is that about?  Sure Christiane Amanpour is CNN’s chief international correspondent, but that makes her a news event how?  Who gives a tinker’s dam about her opinion anyway?  So Syria and North Korea are in cahoots and she wonders if the Bush Administration is going to try to use it as a stick?  Well, duh.  And the Yankees are going to try to win the pendant this year.  Big news flash that!

Weather Underground Terrorists, ah, the company he keeps.

Former Deputy Attorney General Jamie Gorelick, famous for her firewalling intelligence between the FBI and the CIA during the Clinton Administration and as a member of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, shows up as the lead counsel for Duke fighting the suit brought by the wrongfully accused Duke lacrosse players. And surprise, she is just making shit up as she goes, again:

On February 20, the day before this action was filed, Plaintiffs’ media advisor, Robert H. Bork, Jr., of Bork Communication Group LLC, issued a media alert informing the press that a press conference would be held the following day to announce the filing of the suit. Later that day, lead counsel for Duke, Jamie Gorelick, sent an email message to lead counsel for Plaintiffs, Charles J. Cooper, advising: “[A]ccording to our local counsel, the judges of the Middle District of North Carolina have a very strict practice forbidding lawyers from discussing their litigation with the press. I assume that your local counsel has advised you on this.” See Duke Mot., Exh. 3. Given that neither of Plaintiffs’ local counsel, both of whom are experienced North Carolina practitioners, were aware of any such practice, counsel for Plaintiffs made inquiry of other experienced litigators in this Court, including one who has an unparalleled personal familiarity with the practices and policies of the judges of the Middle District of North Carolina. None of the experienced practitioners contacted by counsel for Plaintiffs were aware of the existence of any such local practice in civil litigation, and in fact they denied the existence of any such practice. To be sure, these local practitioners confirmed the general applicability of the restrictions on extrajudicial attorney speech of Rule 3.6 of the North Carolina Rules of Professional Conduct, but counsel for Plaintiffs were quite familiar, of course, with Rule 3.6, and they had no intention, of course, of violating it in any way.