Yes, Gorelick's just the one I'd turn to for counsel. Certainly the unhinged editors at The New York Times believe she's credible, which is why she appeared in print there defending the lawless behavior of Eric Holder's DOJ in the matter of its shotgun attack on the Associated Press.
Following the disclosure that the Justice Department obtained telephone records of Associated Press journalists, the AP and other news organizations have criticized the action as unwarranted interference with the ability of journalists to report on government operations.
As former Justice Department officials, we are worried that the criticism of the decision to subpoena telephone toll records of AP journalists in an important leak investigation sends the wrong message to officials who are responsible for our national security.
...the prosecutors were right to investigate this leak vigorously... But after eight months of intensive effort, it appears that they still could not identify the leaker.
It was only then — after pursuing “all reasonable alternative investigative steps,” as required by the department’s regulations — that investigators proposed obtaining logs of calls made and received for about 20 phone lines that the leaker might have used in conversations with AP journalists. They limited the request to the two months when the leak most likely occurred, and did not propose more intrusive steps.
...They were right to pursue the investigation with “alternative investigative steps” for eight months first. Ultimately, they were right to take it to the next stage when they still needed more to make a case against the leaker. If the Justice Department had not done so, it would have defaulted on its obligation to protect the American people.
As is always the case with the ludicrous Gorelick, she gets her analysis completely backwards. Both Democrats and Republicans have slammed Holder for his "unconstitutional" behavior:
...the DOJ failed to notify the AP of the subpoena issued for phone records before obtaining those documents... “The Code of Federal Regulations states that a news media organization [is] supposed to be notified of the subpoena, and they apparently were not notified of the subpoena. Therefore, that’s a big question that needs to be resolved because it looks like an effort by the government to sidestep a requirement,” [House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob] Goodlatte said.
He pointed out that former Attorney General Michael Mukasey believes the subpoena of “20 reporters over a two-month period of time … was too broad.”
“There is no judge — it’s a subpoena, not a warrant — that’s why it’s a big deal,” Goodlatte said before promising that his committee is “going to pursue this for sure.” ... In an interesting twist, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has ripped the Obama administration for the DOJ probe... “I have trouble defending what the Justice Department did. I don’t know who did it or why it was done, but it’s inexcusable. It’s an issue I feel very strongly about.”
And notice that Dame Disaster carefully ignored the other ongoing DOJ scandals that have made a mockery of the department under Perjurer General Eric Holder: the James Rosen wiretap debacle, Fast and Furious, the New Black Panther insanity, and many more. And, worse still, the very notion that Holder is investigating himself for some of these crimes.
That Gorelick would defend the indefensible is utterly bizarre, but not unexpected coming from the Countess of Catastrophe.
Let me get this straight: your company wants to prevent an out-of-control federal government from nationalizing your sector of the economy. So you hire a key lobbyist to represent your case. And -- of the thousands of connected lobbyists in DC -- you hire "