Sunday, November 28, 2010

Silent Knight

To the Powers that Be:

During my employment at the law firm of Akin, Gump, Strauss, Hauer & Feld (1988-1991) one of the partners was Edward S. Knight, Esq., a Texas lawyer-lobbyist who worked closely with Joel Jankowsky and Robert Strauss.  Jankowsky is now one of the firm's senior managers.  In the late 1990s, during President Clinton's second term, Knight was named General Counsel of the U.S. Department of the Treasury: at that time the parent organization of the U.S. Secret Service.  The Treasury Secretary at that time was Robert Rubin, a close friend of Robert S. Strauss.  It was Strauss, reportedly, who persuaded President Clinton to name Rubin to the post of Treasury Secretary.

In 1997 I sent an employment inquiry to Treasury General Counsel Edward Knight.  I believe that Knight knows a lot about Akin Gump's illegal activities relating to me.  Are we to believe that Knight didn't contact his former law partners at Akin Gump when he received my letter in 1997?

http://dailstrug.blogspot.com/2010/01/edward-s-knight-esq-notice-of-fraud-and.html

If Knight has information that I might have been armed and extremely dangerous in August 1989, as alleged by the D.C. Attorney General to the D.C. Court of Appeals, he has a duty to divulge what he knows.  See Brief of Appellant District of Columbia, Freedman v. D.C. Dept. Human Rights, D.C.C.A. no. 96-CV-961 (Sept. 1, 1998).   If Knight has information concerning Dennis Race's determination in October 1991 that I was potentially violent and a negligence risk to the firm, he has a duty to divulge what he knows.   If Knight has information that I was homicidal and had plans to kill my supervisor and that protective measures had to be taken to guard against a homicidal assault -- as alleged by my direct supervisor in October 1991 -- he has a duty to divulge what he knows.  If Knight has knowledge that, in fact, I engaged in (unspecified) "violent" acts during my employment, as alleged by Dennis Race in a sworn statement to the D.C. Department of Human Rights, he needs to divulge what he knows ("C. Claimant was told that "there did not appear to be a good fit" because of his . . . (3) his violent behavior; and (4) his paranoia.").

Gary Freedman
202 362 7064

4 comments:

Gary Freedman said...

Knight's office was on the firm's 12th floor, as was that of Vernon Jordan.

Gary Freedman said...

Akin Gump partners and their secretaries (from a nonconfidential document):

http://dailstrug.blogspot.com/2009/11/job-of-secretary-is-to-keep-secrets.html

Gary Freedman said...

My letter to White House Counsel Charles Ruff (previously D.C. Corporation Counsel). Ruff served as D.C. Corporation Counsel in 1996 when that office filed a pleading with the D.C. Superior Court alleging that my coworkers genuinely feared that I was armed and extremely dangerous in August 1989.

http://dailstrug.blogspot.com/2010/04/akin-gump-litigation-letter-to-white.html

Lanny Breuer, currently DOJ Criminal Division Chief, worked in the Office of White House Counsel under Ruff and was his law partner at Covington & Burling.

Gary Freedman said...

Complainant was routinely invited to attend, and did attend, legal assistant staff meetings. The legal assistant administrative staff arranged for Complainant to attend Westlaw and Lexis training both on-site and off-site on a number of occasions. Complainant was invited to attend, and did attend, legal assistant seminars including a series of weekly writing seminars for legal assistants in February 1989 conducted by one of the Respondent's associates, Gary Rubin; a cite checking seminar for legal assistants held in about early 1989 conducted by one of Respondent's associates, Michael J. Mueller; and a legislative seminar held in about early 1989 conducted by one of Respondent's partners, Edward S. Knight (?). Also, Complainant was issued personalized Westlaw and Lexis access cards for use in computer searches of legal databases. The issuance of such access cards--indeed, all of the above activities--were unrelated to the Litigation support tasks on which Complainant was engaged during that period and inconsistent with Respondent's representation to the Office of Human Rights that Complainant was employed to manage documents for the client Eastern Airlines.