CNN's Kevin Liptak: Cleta Mitchell's law firm says it's "concerned" she was on Trump's call and "are

[highplainsdem]

working to understand her involvement more thoroughly."

Link to tweet

More on this from NYT's Nick Confessore, including a link to an article:

Link to tweet

"We are aware of, and are concerned by, Ms. Mitchell’s participation in the Jan. 2 conference call and are working to understand her involvement more thoroughly,” Dan Farrell, director of communication for Foley & Lardner, said in a statement Monday."

https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/investigations/daniel-bice/2021/01/04/foley-lardner-concerned-attorneys-role-trumps-georgia-call/4127755001/

From that article in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:

A Milwaukee-based law firm is distancing itself from one of the attorneys involved in President Donald Trump's disturbing call trying to overturn the results of the Georgia election.

Cleta Mitchell, a partner at Foley & Lardner, participated in the Saturday call in which Trump pressured the Georgia secretary of state to "find" 11,780 votes to help Trump win that state's election.

In a statement, a spokesman for Foley said the firm does not represent "any parties seeking to contest the results of the presidential election."

"We are aware of, and are concerned by, Ms. Mitchell’s participation in the Jan. 2 conference call and are working to understand her involvement more thoroughly,” Dan Farrell, director of communication for Foley, said in a statement Monday.

Farrell added that the firm made a decision in November not to take on any clients involved in any matters related to the November presidential election. Former Vice President Joe Biden, a Democrat, defeated Trump with 306 electoral votes to Trump's 232.

-snip-

[Blue Owl]

1. Wait, are you sure this isn't the law firm of Collins, Collins, and Collins?

[gratuitous]

6. Could be

But when your law partners call you out publicly like that, it usually carries a bit more weight than Sen. Collins' profession of concern over yet another criminal transgression by a Republican president. Cleta might have some 'splainin' to do.

[DeminPennswoods]

20. Dewey, Cheatham and Howe

nt

[MontanaMama]

36. Thread winner!!

This reminds me of the Car Talk show on NPR back in the day...

[OMGWTF]

42. I loved that show!

Our Russian chauffeur - Pickup Ndropoff

Our car designer - Bud Tuggley

Our seat tester - Mike Keister

Our weatherman - Luke Outawindow

[MontanaMama]

44. OMG. Forgot about all of those.

That was the best show...

[DonaldsRump]

53. My all-time favorite

Document Security Specialist from Jamaica - Euripides Upman

[DeminPennswoods]

49. That's where I heard it

nt

[NBachers]

32. Conning, Conning, and Conniver

[exboyfil]

2. Here is the statement

https://www.foley.com/en/insights/news/2021/01/firm-response-reports-partner-cleta-mitchells

Firm Response to Reports of Partner Cleta Mitchell’s Involvement in Post-Election Challenges
04 January 2021 Media Contact: Dan Farrell News
Foley & Lardner LLP is not representing any parties seeking to contest the results of the presidential election. In November, the firm made a policy decision not to take on any representation of any party in connection with matters related to the presidential election results. Our policy did allow our attorneys to participate in observing election recounts and similar actions on a voluntary basis in their individual capacity as private citizens so long as they did not act as legal advisers. We are aware of, and are concerned by, Ms. Mitchell’s participation in the January 2 conference call and are working to understand her involvement more thoroughly.

[Leghorn21]

3. Have y'all checked her twitter account or nah

”Donate to Ensure ONLY LEGAL VOTES Count –
Tea Party Patriots”

Link to tweet

[wolfie001]

41. I just sent them a screen shot...

....of the final election results.

[awesomerwb1]

4. Lol You can see the crazy in her eyes

These people are seriously gullible and stupid.

[Arne]

10. Yes the eyes are crazy, but the teeth tell all,

she is literally biting her lip.

[Pepsidog]

27. Haha I said the same thing below. All have that stupid cult loving grin.

[TheBlackAdder]

5. Override safety measures and open the hatch.

.



.

[intheflow]

24. 100% this!!

[brooklynite]

7. DORIS: "What about your bosses...Haislip and Mackenzie and the rest? What do they say?"

GAILEY: "That I'm jeopardizing the prestige and dignity of an old, established law firm...and either I drop this impossible case immediately or they will drop me."

(Miracle on 34th Street)

[FSogol]

8. Someone's getting fired.

[agingdem]

9. Mitchell's law firm is "concerned"...bullshit!

her law firm knew exactly who her client was and they were ok with Cleta advising Trump as long as she was low-profile...now that she's out of the shadows and complicit they have to pull a Susan Collins....when the firm reaches the "distress and dismayed" portion of this charade Cleta will withdraw or resign....

[StarfishSaver]

16. It sounds like they didn't know

My impression is that she was doing this work on the downlow and did not disclose to the firm what she was doing. It's unlikely the firm would out her like this if she had - there'd be a paper trail.

[intheflow]

23. Yeah, I thought maybe she was thinking, "This was how I can

best volunteer with the GOP in service to der Führer 45!"

Knowing her firing is imminent makes me oh-so-happy.

[agingdem]

31. I still think they knew...

assuming Trump was actually paying her bill...and assuming she wasn't getting paid "sub-rosa", the firm was well aware of her special client, Hitler-lite..the law firm's been outed...they're concerned...

[DeminPennswoods]

50. Do you think was actually going to pay her?

After all we've learned about Trump the last 5 years?

[agingdem]

51. I do ...

bilking a contractor is one thing..they don't have the power to fight back, but cheating your lawyer is dangerous...

[Massacure]

25. Not only that, but the firm specifically decided not to take on election cases

There are two angles of potential outrage I see. The first is that Cleta Mitchell involved the law firm in work that her partners specifically did not want the firm involved in. The other is that Cleta was doing legal work outside of law firm, which may or may not be prohibited by her partnership agreement.

How much recourse they have likely depends on how much equity she has in the firm. Parting ways with a partner who has substantial equity ownership can be pretty pricey.

[StarfishSaver]

35. True. Not to mention the possibility of putting the firm in conflict situation with other clients.

It's not always easy to jettison an equity partner, but it's a lot cleaner to do so if they violated the partnership agreement and/or firm policy. Taking on a client without a conflict check is a serious problem - and if the firm wasn't aware she was working on this, that's a pretty clear indication that she didn't do a conflict check.

I think she's toast.

[machoneman]

11. "No, I wasn't fired!" I resigned to spend more time with my family, dontchaknow?"

Hah! One more Trump supporter thrown in the trash of her own accord, losing her job over nonsense. Well played, madame, well played!

Loser!

[StarfishSaver]

12. Whoops

Sounds iike somebody "forgot" to tell their law firm about all of their activities ...

[FakeNoose]

39. It's all about the billable hours

... and whether the client has any intention of paying up.

[StarfishSaver]

43. That's the least of their concerns

[Midnight Writer]

13. She had a legal obligation to warn her client he was breaking the law.

[Cha]

14. Let's see if they're concerned Enough

to fire her criminal ass.

[TeamPooka]

15. Notable clients of the firm include Johnson Controls, Harley Davidson, Major League Baseball, and

Acciona.

Boycott away folks.

[3Hotdogs]

17. Bar Association complaint?

Defending known bullshit?

[intheflow]

18. :O

[musette_sf]

19. Photo physically reminded me of another usual suspect:

And lookie here, what a surprise, NOT! Ginni's Rump-protecting "American D-Day PAC" was set up by none other than...

D.C. lawyer Cleta Mitchell will be setting up the American D-Day PAC and 501(c)(4). Mitchell, currently a partner at the law firm Foley & Lardner, has previously served as a lawyer for the Wellspring Committee, an influential 501(c)(4) which shut down at the end of 2018. According to its last available IRS filing in 2014, Wellspring gave nearly $6.7 million — more than two-thirds of its expenditures that year — to the Judicial Crisis Network, a group dedicated to promoting conservative judges.

https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2019/06/virginia-thomas-extends-her-conservative-reach-for-2020/

[yesphan]

21. She was my

poli/sci instructor at OU back in 82. She was democrat then. My how she's changed.

[nolabear]

29. I'll say one thing. Either that's an old photo or she's aged well.

[Pepsidog]

22. You can see it in her stupid face and smile-Trumpers all have that stupid cult loving grin.

[Hekate]

26. Well that sounds promising

[matt819]

28. I'm not sure how law firms work. . .

But I would think a partner could exercise their judgment in responding to a request for service.

I know nothing of this law firm and its overall political stance, but it seems to me that their throwing one of their own under the bus.

Perhaps a more appropriate response would have been something along the lines that partners in the law firm have the authority to respond to a request for service, and we are confident that that this is what occurred in this instance. Although our policy has been not to become involved in lawsuits connected to the election, we respect our partner's decision to provide her valuable services in this instance. We generally do not comment on our clients and the work we undertake for them, and so we will comment no further on this case.

Or something like that.

But, no. They threw her under the bus (operative word there is her).

[StarfishSaver]

37. No - they can't just represent whomever they want

Last edited Mon Jan 4, 2021, 06:32 PM - Edit history (1)

An attorney in a firm is not an independent actor. They are agents of the firm. If any attorney represents a client, it is actually the firm that represents them, not the individual attorney. And there are specific things an attorney must do before agreeing to represent any client, regardless who they are.

Among other things, before taking on a client, every attorney in a firm must circulate a "conflict check" which all other attorneys must sign off on to ensure that the new client doesn't pose a conflict of interest with any existing client or matter involving other attorneys in the firm. The conflict check also puts firm management on notice of the potential client in case there's some other reason the firm might not want to take that client on.

And attorneys often also have a heightened duty to notify the firm and get special permission to take a high profile, political or controversial client because such representation could pose significant issues for the firm. The partnership would need to be fully aware of the attorney's involvement with such a client.

If she didn't do a conflict check and didn't make a special point that she was representing the President of the United States, she threw the firm under the bus, not vice versa and they'd have every right and justification to give her the boot.

[oldsoftie]

45. Exactly. The firm had already said they werent getting involved in the election.

I guess the other poster was keying on the fact that Cleta is a woman. for whatever reason that matters.

[StarfishSaver]

47. It also sounds like they have no idea how law firms and legal representation operate

[nolabear]

30. Depends if she's acting as a representative of the firm or independently.

Whatever her contract states will be key. I have a hunch she’s freelancing here and they want to either be sure everyone knows or fire her ass for violating terms of the contract. Law firms do not play.

[StarfishSaver]

38. If she's a partner in the law firm, she can't operate independently without their authorization

[ralps]

33. From the article she also works for the Bradley foundation! Oh my!

[NBachers]

34. I hear Rudy's hiring.

[badboy67]

40. Uh huh.

[Hugin]

46. There they go, throwing around the c-word.

Doesn't Collins have a copyright or something?

[StarfishSaver]

48. They're laying the groundwork or firing her

As well they should. If she didn't disclose she was working for Trump on an issue they had steered clear of, she's toast. And needs to be.

[Gothmog]

52. Foley & Lardner To Feel Wrath Of The Lincoln Project

The Lincoln Project got Jones Day to drop trump as a client. This will be fun to watch

Link to tweet

Free advice for all Biglaw firms: you will be held accountable in the court of public opinion for the work you and your partners do. That’s a lesson Jones Day is well acquainted with. As is Porter Wright. And King & Spalding. And Hogan Lovells. You get the point. So if a partner at your firm plays a prominent role in one of the most shocking phone calls in American history, well, you’ve got some ‘splaining to do.

Of course I’m talking about Foley & Lardner partner Cleta Mitchell’s participation in Donald Trump’s harassing of Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger to just “find 11,780 votes.” It seems that the never-Trump PAC The Lincoln Project has turned their attention to Biglaw over the incident.

Link to tweet

There are already murmurs of Foley losing business over Mitchell’s involvement in the debacle, and tweets like these from The Lincoln Project only ups the pressure.

And they aren’t the only PAC paying attention to Biglaw. MeidasTouch — remember they are the ones that actually drew first blood in the campaign against Jones Day — has turned their attention to Foley & Lardner. One the the PAC’s founders, Ben Meiselas, partner at Geragos & Geragos, has been very vocal about the firm’s involvement, specifically when Foley attorney Jason Villalba tweeted (though he’s since deleted it) about the now infamous phone call without condemning Mitchell’s involvement.