You do realize that Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP

[no_hypocrisy]

won't be able to represent any client who/that opposes Trump because of the inherent conflict of interest issues once the firm does even a hour of pro bono representation.

If their client(s) doesn't raise the issue, the Trump WH will.

An attorney faces a conflict of interest when representing a client and then against that same client, or a former client, in a substantially related matter, violating ethical duties of loyalty and confidentiality, potentially leading to disqualification or disbarment.

ABA Rule 1.7 Conflict of Interest: Current Clients - Comment

https://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibility/publications/model_rules_of_professional_conduct/rule_1_7_conflict_of_interest_current_clients/comment_on_rule_1_7/

D.C. Bar -- Conflict of Interest
https://www.dcbar.org/for-lawyers/legal-ethics/rules-of-professional-conduct/client-lawyer-relationship/conflict-of-interest-general-rule

[msongs]

1. effing cowards appease the tyrant without a fight nt

[Baitball Blogger]

2. Good point.

I do have a question on how a political law firm can claim objectivity when they have lawyers from both parties in the law firm. Morgan and Morgan is one of them. If I were a client I would NOT trust the firewall concept.

On Edit: I left out the negative. I know two people rec'd this post before I made myself clear. Central Florida has a strange good ole boy situation going on with public lawyers and I just wouldn't trust any law firm that has includes them as partners when they're from both parties.

[Ms. Toad]

4. Some conflicts can be waived, after full disclosure.

But there has to be full disclosure and a waiver by all conflicted parties.

And I'm pretty sure having counsel for both parties on the same case (or closely related matters) is not waivable.

[Baitball Blogger]

6. I miswrote that. I would not trust the firewall concept because I know how the good ole boy work in our

area. What they will do is give you your free consultation, find out what you know, and then bow out.

[Ms. Toad]

7. That is an issue.

Or, worse yet, consult you because they expect counsel from the other side of the matter they are consulting on might want to hire you - for the sole purpose of conflicting you out as opposing counsel.

[Baitball Blogger]

8. Yep.

All kinds of slimey things they do.

[Ms. Toad]

3. They aren't doing pro bono work **for the government**.

They are doing pro bono work on causes Trump likes (like the veteran's work they are already doing, or like work on antisemitism - the two causes I've seen specifically mentioned).

There is no more a conflict of interest in doing this work now than there was last year when they did work on the same causes/for the same clients.

[Irish_Dem]

5. Attorneys will demand your voting record before they represent you.

Cowards.