Tuesday, July 13, 2010

Did the President's Own Lawyer Determine that the Treasury Department General Counsel Had a Fiduciary Relationship with Suspected Racketeers? What Did the U.S. Marshal Say?

These are the facts.  Charles F.C. Ruff, Esq. served as Counsel to the President in the Clinton Administration and defended President Clinton in the Senate Impeachment trial.   He had earlier served as Attorney General of the District of Columbia.

During my tenure at the law firm of Akin, Gump, Strauss, Hauer & Feld (1988 to 1991) Edward S. Knight, Esq., one of the firm's Legislative Practice Group partners, worked closely with Joel Jankowsky, Esq. who, during my tenure at the firm, was head of the firm's Legislative Practice Group and a member of the firm's three-member Executive Committee (which also included Vernon E. Jordan, Jr.).  Mr. Knight later served as General Counsel of the U.S. Department of the Treasury in the Clinton Administration, in the late 1990s during the Senate impeachment trial of President Clinton.

The D.C. Office of Attorney General (acting through Charles F.C. Ruff, Esq.) took the position before the D.C. Superior Court in 1996 that my belief that Akin Gump's managers (a class of persons that included Joel Jankowsky and Vernon E. Jordan, Jr.) engaged in, or approved the commission of, criminal acts, specifically, approving the break-in of my residence in January 1990 and conspiring to solicit confidential mental health information from my treating psychiatrists in violation of the D.C. Mental Health Information Act of 1978 (from 1989 through 1991) -- acts that in their entirety might constitute the crime of racketeering under federal law -- was genuine. Brief of Appellee District of Columbia at 5-12, Freedman v. D.C. Dept. Human Rights, D.C.C.A. no. 96-CV-961 (Sept. 1, 1998). Neither Edward S. Knight, Joel Jankowsky, Vernon E. Jordan, Jr. or any Akin Gump attorney manager disputed the D.C. Attorney General's position or questioned its legal or factual relevance.


On January 15, 2010 the U.S. Marshal Service implicitly cautioned me against questioning the validity of the D.C. Court of Appeals' 1998 opinion in Freedman, and by extension cautioned that I should not question the validity of the determination of the D.C. Attorney General (Charles F.C. Ruff) that an employee of Akin Gump formed a genuine, good faith belief that Joel Jankowsky (who worked closely with Edward S. Knight, Esq.), Vernon E. Jordan, Jr., or other Akin Gump attorney managers approved the break-in of my apartment in January 1990.

At least one attorney (Pennsylvania Bar ID #41032) who used to be employed at Akin Gump has formed a genuine, good faith belief that Joel Jankowsky, Vernon E. Jordan, Jr., or other Akin Gump attorney manager approved the commission of a felony in 1990. That's the opinion of former D.C. Attorney General Charles F.C. Ruff.

What did the U.S. Marshal say?

The action of the D.C. Courts in ruling in favor of D.C. Attorney General Charles F.C. Ruff should not be questioned. And that's what the U.S. Marshal has implicitly said. Precisely how the U.S. Marshal has jurisdiction over persons who criticize a state court decision is not entirely clear. But then, the U.S. Marshal is under the purview of the Attorney General of the United States, Eric H. Holder, Jr. And the Attorney General is a personal friend of senior Akin, Gump management partner, Vernon E. Jordan, Jr.  Also, Attorney General Holder and the late Charles F.C. Ruff were partners at the same law firm, Covington & Burling.

Incidentally, Attorney General Eric H. Holder, Jr. served as Deputy U.S. Attorney General in the Clinton Administration at the same time Charles F.C. Ruff defended President Clinton's Senate Impeachment trial and Edward S. Knight served as General Counsel of the Treasury Department.  Vernon E. Jordan, Jr. was a close personal friend of President Clinton's.

Is it a mere coincidence that a senior Akin Gump management partner Vernon E. Jordan, Jr. (who was a member of the firm's three-member Executive Committee) allegedly tried to buy the silence of a White House intern in the late 1990s -- an individual who had incriminating evidence that would eventually lead to the impeachment of the President of the United States in a trial in which Charles F.C. Ruff served as defense counsel for the President?

Perhaps this matter should be brought to the attention of the Inspector General of the United States.


1 comment:

Gary Freedman said...

Consider the fact that the George Washington University Medical Center (GW) diagnosed me with bipolar disorder (1992-1993), a psychotic mental illness, which later underwent a miraculous spontaneous remission.

GW later diagnosed me with paranoid schizophrenia (1996), a psychotic mental illness, which also later underwent a miraculous spontaneous remission.

Results of comprehensive psychological testing performed by GW did not disclose any psychiatric disorder in me at all.

Akin Gump alleges (with no supporting documentation) that it had spoken to two mental health professionals (including a world renowned psychiatrist) prior to my job termination in 1991 who agreed with Akin Gump's attorney managers that I should be fired from my job by reason of severe mental illness. I had an exemplary job record with no evidence of disciplinary infractions. The mental health consultants did not evaluate me personally.

I had lodged a harassment complaint against my supervisor (who it later turns out was a racist) with Akin Gump's attorney managers in 1991 -- but in response to a complaint filed by the D.C. Department of Human Rights (May 22, 1992) the firm was silent as to my complaint against that supervisor. A senior Akin Gump manager is a prominent African American civil rights leader.

Wake up, people!!! How stupid does Akin Gump think we all are??????

Where am I? Is this a dream? What in God's name is going on here?