- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
You're the best Glenn, but disagree with you about the representation of Chiquita. This is not merely zealous representation that Chiquita is getting, but it is the best that money can buy. There is no way this can be compared to indigent criminal defense, where your reasoning is usually employed. This is representation of a company with very deep pockets. A lawyer is not ethically obliged to take on any case, and many would be willing to step into Holder's shoes and receive those huge payments.
I understand your reasoning, but look more closely at it and I think you'll see a mere defense of the status quo and the powerful. We have a system where vicious, and like you said evil companies are entitled to the best defense money can buy. The lawyers who provide this are then shielded from any blame because of this facetious reasoning that is drilled into us in law school. The poor, the weak are then entitled to representation, yes. But very limited as any look at the racial and socioeconomic make up of our jails show. I know this is very disjointed, but I just think it is wrong for a person, let alone one aspiring to public office, to represent a company that eliminates other human beings in pursuit of profit.
