Yesterday I had completed a 3-hour Ethics CLE program for a distinguish national law firm’s D.C. office, aided by my sister, retired justice Dept. and HHS attorney Edith Marshall. (This time, her role was to lead the attendees in the chorus section of my legal ethics parody of “Trouble in River City” from “The Music Man.”) I knew that I should have gotten some posts done when I returned, but a) I was exhausted and b) there were two Game Five play-off games to watch. Sometimes, baseball comes first. Priorities! Congratulations to the St. Louis Cardinals for an upset win over the Braves, whose horrible fate of giving up ten runs in the first inning I wouldn’t even wish on the Yankees. Imagine knowing you have lost before your team even gets up to bat, and that you’re in front of the home team fans who will have to suffer through three hours of slow, inevitable humiliation. Ugh. The Braves lost with as much dignity as possible in such a hopeless situation. And congratulations to the resurgent Washington Nationals, who came back from a late deficit to tie the game in the eighth, and then won on a grand slam in the tenth. They are now headed to the seven game play-off to determine who represents the NL in the World Series, the first time a Washington, D.C. team has been this close since 1933. D.C. really needed this.
1. Should it matter? Minnesota Fifth District Rep. Ilhan Omar, she of “The Squad” fame (or infamy) has filed for divorce from husband Ahmed Hirsi, whom she only married last year, though he is the father of her three children. Omar’s petition for dissolution of her marriage has been posted online here. Our sole Somali Muslim House member previously was married to Ahmed Nur Said Elmi, who appears to be her brother and whom she married to perpetrate a citizenship fraud in 2009. Omar legally dissolved that marriage in 2017. There appears to have been a period where she was married to both men. Omar has never given a straightforward explanation for her tangled domestic affairs.
Should any of this matter? These things really do constitute “personal, private conduct,” unlike the workplace misconduct that the enablers of Bill Clinton tried to defend by using that term. If Omar did perpetrate a fraud, however, or was married to two husbands, those are very relevant to her fitness to serve as a law-maker.
2. Of course Warren’s digging in. She’s a shameless liar and a demagogue. Democratic presidential candidate and, some say, front-runner Elizabeth Warren is doubling down on her debunked story that she was fired from her teaching job for being “visibly pregnant.” Video evidence and school records indicate otherwise, but this is the same tactical path she trod when her fake Cherokee credentials were called into question. Warren is devotee of the Clintons’ “deny, deny, deny” methodology when caught red-handed, or, in Warren’s case regarding her Native American lie, non-red-handed. [Eh, the joke was there for the picking. Had to take it…]
In an interview with CBS News this week, Warren said, “All I know is I was 22-years- old, I was six months pregnant, and the job that I had been promised for the next year was going to someone else. The principal said they were going to hire someone else for my job.” That spin is now a standard part of her stump speech.Yet a video that had been posted to YouTube in 2008 shows Warren explaining that her decision to leave teaching was hers alone. When asked about this contradiction this week, Warren explained, “After becoming a public figure I opened up more about different pieces in my life and this was one of them.” That does not explain why documents from the local Board of Education where she taught showed that her contract had been renewed, but that she resigned two months later. “The resignation of Mrs. Elizabeth Warren, speech correctionist, effective June 30, 1971 was accepted with regret,” the June 16, 1971, minutes read.
Warren concedes she was officially offered the position for the following year. but claims that up until then she was hiding her pregnancy. Once she could no longer hide it, she said she was “shown the door.” Yet according to CBS News, “Two retired teachers who worked at Riverdale Elementary for over 30 years, including the year Warren was there said that they don’t remember anyone being explicitly fired due to pregnancy during their time at the school.”
3. Not Right, not Left, just stupid. The City of Portland has banned urinals in the $195 million remodeling of the Portland Building, which houses administrative offices for the city. While urinals use less water than toilets,Portland sees them as a bigoted relic of an oppressive era. Or somethings:
A spokeswoman told NBC affiliate KGW News that she could not estimate how much it will cost to remove the urinals, which have been a feature of the building since its construction in 1982.
Chief Administrative Officer Tom Rinehart explained the urinal ban in an email to employees last February.
“We will continue to have gender-specific (male and female) multi-stall restrooms that are readily available to any employee that prefers to use one. But, there will be no urinals in any restroom in the building. This will give us the flexibility we need for any future changes in signage,” he wrote.
4. Whose statement is more unethical? Oh, Hillary wins this one hands down. President Trump’s entry was this tweet, another now nauseatingly familiar, petty, un-Presidential trolling exercise:
Would Trump love to see Clinton mess up the Democratic Presidential sweepstakes even more than it already is? Sure he would. Hillary naturally rose to the bait, telling PBS’s Judy Woodruff,
“You know, it truly is remarkable how obsessed he remains with me. But this latest tweet is so typical of him. Nothing has been more examined and looked at than my e-mails. We all know that. So he’s either lying or delusional, or both. There was no subpoena, as he says in a tweet this morning. So maybe there does need to be a rematch. Obviously, I can beat him again.”
First, her emails haven’t been examined and looked at, since Clinton did indeed make certain that 30,000 of them disappeared. Second, even as the Washington Post’s ‘factcheck” tried to spin for her, it had to admit that the emails had been subpoenaed before she had them destroyed. Third, a similar sequence of events in a looming law suit or criminal investigation would be treated as spoliation, the illegal destruction of evidence.
Finally, Hillary did not “beat” Trump in the election. He beat her, by the rules of the election process, as established by the U.S. Constitution. She’s appealing to bias and ignorance.