- Quickdraw McLaw
- 57 Comments
- 178 Views
There is one statewide race on this fall’s general election ballot that readers of this blog can offer some insight on: attorney general. Unlike the races for the bench, this is a partisan office and may very well affect the outcome, but we thought we’d give you a chance to weigh in on the qualifications of the candidates and tell us who should be elected as Nevada’s top state attorney. The three candidates are: Jonathan J. Hansen (IAP); Adam Paul Laxalt (REP); and Ross Miller (DEM). Although there are three candidates, this race is primarily between Laxalt and Miller–both legacy candidates who are following in the footsteps of previously elected Nevada politicians with the same last (and/or middle) names.
Ralston Reports has a lengthy piece up on the recent debate between Laxalt and Miller which brings us to three specific questions we’d like your input on below:
- How should the leak of the Lewis & Roca review of Laxalt affect this race–does his performance at a law firm indicate how he will perform as AG?
- How does Laxalt’s military career and prosecution of terrorists in Iraq affect this race?
- How does Miller’s (disclosed) acceptance of gifts affect this race?
Who should be elected as Nevada’s Attorney General?
One thing to remember about the leak is that it's inherently unreliable. LRR has not identified the leaker or even confirmed the document, and the alleged authors haven't confirmed it, either. Laxalt says he never saw it. Miller says he knows nothing about it. The document could very well be a fabrication by someone who supports Miller or who just dislikes Laxalt. Even if authentic, consider that the persons writing the bad reviews may themselves be bad attorneys whose opinions aren't worth much. We've all seen that before. Laxalt released other reviews that were pretty good. Miller probably has both good and bad reviews in his past, as well, but no one has leaked his.
That is all possible. Although I think that if the document was fabricated, LRR would be the first one to point that out. It's much more likely that it was leaked by a rogue employee and LRR is just trying to sweep it under the rug and hope it all goes away.
It was posted on Ralston and it looks to me like it was mainly one partner who had Laxalt work on a non-billing matter she took on and offloaded to him and wouldn't work on. And I still can't believe that a law firm can't figure out which of the people who works for them put it out publicly because that person thought it helped his/her agenda politically. That's just outrageous in a law firm as prominent as this one yet no one is asking why. If this is ok and let slip then why not client confidences next? This to me is the most disturbing piece of all this: that this firm either can't or won't deal with this breach of security.
Interesting on how Miller's campaign (or supporting entity) capitalized on it. You have to admit that the latest commercial is damaging.
On what planet would LR either identify the leaker or confirm the document? The fact that LR has not come out and said the document is fake suggests it is legit. Not saying that makes the comments necessarily accurate – I have no idea. However, all indications are that the document is legit.
Would someone please get rid of Gina Bongiovi as the spokesperson for Question 3? I am getting tired of seeing her nostrils.
I thought she looked hot. 🙂
Absolutely right. She's way hot!
You have really low standards!
Really? Would you be commenting if it was a male attorney? Doubtful. There's nothing wrong with Gina's looks and you're obviously a douche for saying as much. She's speaking up for a cause she supports and at the same time getting her name out there. Seems like a great marketing strategy. Perhaps you're just a jealous, ugly mug and you might need to get over yourself. #schmifna
7:17 – oh please, stop with the gender whining. Anyone who puts him or herself out in the public eye is fair game. I have seen plenty of comments on here about Glen Lerner's physical attributes and other male attorneys.
7:17..okay, gina. you are as obvious as you are nuts! you are still ugly!
7:17 here…I'm not Gina, but that was a really good guess. You obviously put a lot of thought into it. 8:47 has inspired me. New goal – I'm going to comment on the appearance of as many men mentioned on this blog as I can.
7:17 and 9:15…nice disguise, gina. make making yourself look like an idiot.
keep
9:17 (and 9:19)….hahahahahaha you're so funny
Thank you, gina. We all live for your approval :).
7:17 is a gender troll. Go back to reading your left wing articles and getting upset about stuff that has nothing to do with you. Fight the fight that no one cares about.
That is why Ms. Bon Jovi is a good spokesman for Proposal 3.
Wrong, 11:24. Lots of women (and men) care about sexism. And complaining about whether a woman is hot or not instead of evaluating the policy position she's advocating for is sexism. There's a lot of that shit on this blog and I appreciate that people are calling it out and not letting it slide. (Although calling somebody a jealous ugly mug in response, is not a great way to make a point about sexism.)
12:28
Where does 11:24 say anything about a jealous ugly mug?
People who get upset about someone noting that someone is attractive need to get better hobbies in their lives than just looking for a reason to get upset. Maybe you can go start an organization like the one Camryn Manheim started for fat people, and then go organize a parade and go march in it in protest against the recognition of attractive people.
Oh, sookie, sookie….Bongiovi's manicured claws are coming out….
The State Bar shows Laxalt as joining the bar in 2012. Other issues aside, how can anyone with less than 3 years experience as a Nevada attorney believe that they are qualified to serve as AG? Crazy.
but … but … Laxalt!!
He's delusional if he think he's qualified (which is what makes be believe every word of that performance review). I'm voting for the guy who wasn't described by his colleagues as "a train wreck."
Yeah, that was what I found disconcerting about the performance review. Not the legal work, because I imagine that would be a difficult transition. But fact that he was complaining about not getting the important and high level work that he felt he deserved. You've got to work your way up to that, pal. Just like those of us without connections.
You sure he wasn't just tabbed as a candidate because he is a Laxalt, not because he is qualified? Hutchinson would have been better, but he has his eyes on being governor (as does Miller). The Rs couldn't have put up a better candidate?
I think Laxalt took the Illinois Bar in 2005 or 2006, which means he's been a lawyer plenty long. This may be shocking to 9:33, but there are lawyers outside of Nevada. Some even move here.
Plenty long? Practicing for 8 years is long enough to run a large law firm?
3:29, perhaps Laxalt should be running for AG of Illinois. Presumably the Nevada AG should know about Nevada law before taking on the role as the lead attorney for the state. I get that there are deputies who actually do the bulk of the work, but the head of the office should have considerable experience within the state. He/she should at least be around for a few legislative sessions, understand the operations of administrative procedures, and know directions to the Pardons Board Meetings before running for office. There are probably 5,000 or more qualified, practicing attorneys in Nevada who would be better suited to be AG than this carpetbagger with a pretty last name.
OK, people need no understand what "carpetbagger" means. A person new to a state running for political office (Laxalt, Hillary Clinton) is not a "carpetbagger." A person who moves to a war-torn or otherwise impoverished area to sell high-demand goods at exorbitant prices is a carpetbagger. The term was coined after some unscrupulous salesmen figuratively crammed carpets into bags and traveled down south to sell them at high prices to people whose communities had been destroyed in the war. The definition of carpetbagger: learn it, love it, live it.
Also @7:37, learn what "figuratively" means. You meant "literally" which is often misused, so I should just stop here. Sorry.
Also, carpetbagger is not a term derived from people stuffing carpets into bags (how would that even work), but because a "carpet bag" was a type of luggage (usually made from cut up carpets, but not always). The term "carpetbagger" came about because the people who moved south often carried carpet bags as a type of luggage. So let's put the high horse back in the stable, okay?
Let's focus on something important, the question always on my mind is whether the carpet matches the drapes. Or even better, maybe the carpet has been removed and it is simply smooth and shiny tile.
curtains
I just love that a conversation about Laxalt's qualifications devolved into an argument about whether carpetbaggers actually stuffed carpets into bags.
8:28, no, I meant "figuratively." Carpetbaggers didn't actually cram carpets into bags. They were depicted as doing that in political cartoons because that's what they were doing figuratively. Also, the newer online definition only came about in the last few years because people have been misusing the term.
No my recollection from history class was their luggage was made out of old carpet, thus "carpetbag." Never heard of them cramming carpet in a bag.
I, for one, don't give much credence to law firm reviews. They certainly don't have anything to do with how Laxalt will perform as attorney general. Associate at Lewis & Roca and attorney general are two very different things. I think his experience as a JAG is helpful, but not sure how that experience translates to attorney general.
Miller gives me concern because he accepted all those gifts and because of how he responded to having his picture all over the election pages and ballots. Yes, he is NV SOS and he should help people know they're at the official website, but how does his picture accomplish that. Most Nevadans don't know him from the next guy and isn't that why we have a state seal?
I am not crazy about either Laxalt or Miller. May have to vote independent on this one. Actually, inspired to vote independents, because I am tired of the nepotism in this town.
IAP (Independent American Party) is NOT a nonpartisan candidate. The IAP is a party with rather extreme (when compared to the norm) views on many issues. The founder selected the name "Independent American Party" because many people who wish to register as nonpartisan believe that "independent" is the appropriate designation for such a registration, as opposed to nonpartisan. Although, to be completely candid, the party will tell you this isn't true, and that they are "independent" of the two major parties and that's why they use the name Independent American Party. I, personally, think that's disingenuous at best, but who knows what evil lurks in the heart of men?
The Shadow knows!
To 7:47. That is the most ridiculous description I have ever had the misfortune of reading. Do you just make this stuff up as you drone on – or are you quoting Fox News? Who are you? It sounds like you graduated the 6th grade with Jethro!
Dirty…Dirty politics. I think this has backfired on Miller. Lawyers are brutal with criticism–especially partners at firms. Doubt Laxalt was told anything about his review or even knew about e-mails. It just shows how law firms which are in the business of confidentiality are not very confidential. Why did they put any of this in writing? Most folks don't know that employers keep "secret files" that the departing employee never gets to see. Laxalt has a great case for damage to his reputation and violations of several federal laws even if he is a public figure. Voting for Laxalt because this just stinks. Wasn't Miller just an average Deputy DA? How long did he work at the DA's office before seeking office. Thought he was just there a short time.
Did the review say that he was told that he wasn't going to get a raise? That would imply that he was told about the contents of his review. Either way, I'm sure he is considering his legal rights to pursue an action against LRR (although I don't believe defamation would be a ground since the review was based on opinion/truth).
Personnel records are confidential and this is a clear breach. Personnel records are protected by several federal statutes–the employee must be given access. It is a violation of privacy and actionable to release such records or publish them without a full release. LRR better notify their carrier if he does not get elected. Negligence and errors and omissions. Oh my. I suspect that the offending partner will be gone very soon over this.
LRR will hang someone out to dry.
"Voting for Laxalt because this just stinks"
Is that your only reason? The law firm screwed up, don't hold that against Miller
Please tell me what federal laws this violated. I practice employment law, and I know of none. The document did not have confidential medical or financial information. NRS 613.075 requires employers to allow an employee to view CERTAIN personnel documents and provide copies UPON THE EMPLOYEE'S REQUEST if done within 60 days of termination of employment. There is no law prohibiting an employer from including something in an employee's file without the employee's knowledge. Nor is there any law that necessarily requires a private Nevada employer to allow the employee to see a performance review (unless, for example, the review led to disciplinary action). No employer can prevent a rogue employee from breaking rules and disclosing a document like this. I seriously doubt the leaker was a partner – in my opinion, it's more likely that it was a support person who had access to it through job duties (administrative, IT or something). If LR was able to identify the leaker, I expect that person was fired. however don't expect any employer to come out with some announcement identifying the perpetrator and the punishment meted out. I am in no way saying the negative comments about Laxalt are necessarily true – I don't know the guy and have no idea about his abilities. However, if the comments here are coming from attorneys, the willingness to spout off about what "federal law" does or does not say despite complete ignorance is rather startling.
8:37 is Shocked, *shocked*, that a lawyer would say some untrue thing about the law as if it were universally known to be true. 8:37 has never been opposite 3/4 of the attorneys I have gone against
9:19 – alas, yes I have. I guess I am still in denial.
Does the name Laxalt mean anything to the average voter now?
Might mean something in the North. I don't think it matters in the South. It's like that old governor who works for Kolesar. Would anyone even know he was governor if they weren't told?
Who the hell is Russell, the governor from 50's or 60's? But you hear his granddaughter name drop her pedigree like she had Hershey Squirts.
Laxalt's military service is admirable, but beyond that has nothing to do with being AG. Laxalt has had to admit it was a legit review, that's why his campaign is now calling it "stolen."
The gifts were legal and disclosed. Should they not be legal? Of course, but so long as they are, I am not holding it against him
I was curious if the reviews were just from an angry partner. But go online to watch the first Laxalt-Miller debate. Laxalt seems to know nothing about the law. I now believe the reviews were tame.
The biggest thing for me is that Laxalt has lived in Nevada for less than three years of his life and just came here to trade on his family name. He doesn't know anything about our state.
The sums of those gifts are pretty high for Miller…it shows a little lack of judgment for someone in his position to accept that much in gifts. It is not like his family is hurting for $$
Was on the fence of voting for Earley, but I am not voting for her, because Dennis Prince is supporting her. That guy is an asshole.
That is a cogent, logical, well-articulated opinion. I'm sold. Steve Smith it is.