From Glenn Zelniker:
Sorry for the bulk email, but I thought this urgent enough that I wanted to quickly get it into as many hands as possible. I and many others are concerned that there might be ulterior motives (imagine that!) for Alice Fisher’s appointment as the prosecutor of record in the Abramoff case. You might recall that there were some questions about Fisher and interrogation tactics at Guantamo — questions that stalled her nomination. But you might not recall that there were also questions about her connections to Tom DeLay. I’m not sure if anyone noticed that Fisher’s law firm, Latham & Watkins, defended Bill Frist’s family’s HCA in their massive fraud suit. Granted, it’s a big firm and Fisher was but one of many partners. But between the lack of prosecutorial experience and the ties to DeLay and possibly to Frist, we should be asking if Fisher is an appropriate prosecutor for this case, don’t you think?
‘Alice S. Fisher was appointed by President George W. Bush in a recess appointment August 31, 2005…’
‘Vermont Senator Patrick J. Leahy said in his May 12, 2005, statement. “I am somewhat concerned, however, that Ms. Fisher is nominated for one of the most visible prosecutorial positions in the country without ever having prosecuted a case, and she brings to the position minimal trial experience in any context,” he said.’
‘Leahy was also concerned about “reports that she has had ties to Congressman Tom DeLay’s defense team” and “also [wanted] to know what steps she [intended] to take to avoid a conflict of interest in the Department’s investigation of lobbyist Jack Abramoff and possibly Mr. DeLay.”‘
‘Fisher, then working at the law firm of Latham & Watkins in Washington, where she was a partner, was awaiting Senate confirmation of her nomination.’