Category Archives: Bill Sorrell

Bill Sorrell’s ethical quagmire

6 Replies

h/t to Ice-T, once a gangsta.

h/t to Ice-T, once a gangsta.

So I finally read through the cache of Bill Sorrell emails uncovered by Paul Heintz and Brady Toensing, and boy do I need a shower.

The Eternal General’s correspondence with high-priced lawyers at big-time law firms may not constitute illegal activity, but it does reveal an unseemly, fundamentally squicky ethical swampland. Sorrell happily splashes around in this slime pit like it’s the kiddie pool at one of those swanky hotels he enjoys on the law firms’ dime.

In public service, there should be distinct lines between friend, colleague, benefactor, client, and adversary. In his communications with these lawyers, Sorrell stomps and pisses all over those lines until they all but disappear.

Perhaps my interpretation is skewed by the fact that I have more doctors than lawyers in my family. It used to be that doctors routinely accepted gifts, meals, and expensive travel from drug company representatives. Since then, the profession’s standards have tightened considerably. Doctors, health care organizations and professional societies have very strict limits on such things.

With Sorrell, it’s the Wild West. And while he can assert that his conduct is not affected by all the freebies, the appearance itself is awful. Especially for the guy who’s supposed to be the people’s lawyer.

Continue reading →

Kremlinology III: the public and the private

Leave a reply

Not to beat a dead horse, but something just occurred to me about Bill Sorrell’s presence and/or absence at recent gubernatorial signing events.

To recap, on Monday I noted our Eternal General’s conspicuous absence at two recent events, and the even more conspicuous presence of Sorrell’s once and (perhaps) future challenger, TJ Donovan. Three days later, the Governor’s office released a photo of Shumlin signing a bill in the presence of Sorrell and many of his staffers.

But there’s one huge difference between the latter occurrence and its predecessors.

The two non-Sorrell signings were public events with the media on hand. Thursday’s signing was a closed affair in the Governor’s office. No reporters, no video, no pictures except the official one.

The obvious explanation: there’s no way in Hell that Governor Shumlin wants to stand next to Bill Sorrell in the presence of reporters. We’d ask a few courtesy queries about the issue of the day, and then we’d bombard both men with questions about Sorrell’s ethical troubles. Shumlin would have to stand close by while Sorrell tried to explain himself; and even worse, Shumlin would have to give his take on the whole affair. “Do you stand by the Attorney General?” “Do you think he should continue to serve?” “Is it proper for The People’s Lawyer to accept free travel, accommodations, deluxe meals, and political donations from law firms that do business with the state?”

Etc., etc., etc.

The Governor would decline comment because of the ongoing investigation, but boy, would it be uncomfortable.

It’s a profoundly weird situation when you think about it: the Governor and the Attorney General, both elected officials from the same party, can’t appear in public together for fear of embarrassing questions.

Kremlinology II: Back from Siberia

Leave a reply

I’m sure this is juuuuuuuuuust a coincidence.

Three days ago, I wrote a piece about Attorney General Bill Sorrell’s conspicuous absence from a pair of recent gubernatorial photo-ops. Both times, the theme was related to law and justice; both times, our Eternal General was nowhere to be seen while Chittenden County State’s Attorney (and former Sorrell challenger) TJ Donovan was in prime photo-op position, directly behind the Governor’s shoulder.

Well, today brought another law-related bill signing… and guess who was back, baby?

ShumlinSorrell

Yep, there’s Bill Sorrell. Along with, so I’ve been told, many members of his staff, gathered closely around the Governor. And no sign of Donovan.

I smell overcompensation.

Do I dare take some credit for this? The timing certainly suggests I can.

Kremlinology: Sorrell on the outs?

Leave a reply

h/t Snoop Dogg.

h/t Snoop Dogg.

Poor, poor Bill Sorrell. Our embattled Attorney General faces an independent investigation by straight shooter Tom Little. His unwarranted crackdown on Dean Corren’s minuscule offense has cost him many a friend at the Statehouse.

Strike that. I don’t think he’s ever had very many “friends.” But lately it’s become acceptable to express one’s disdain for a man who ought to be a pillar of the Vermont Democratic Party by dint of seniority alone. Instead, many Dems are hoping against hope that Chittenden County State’s Attorney TJ Donovan will again challenge Sorrell in the party primary.

Indeed, it may not be too strong to say that Sorrell has become a pariah. Evidence: On two recent occasions, Governor Shumlin has held justice-related media events. In both cases, Donovan was conspicuously close to the Governor.

And in both cases, the state’s top law enforcement official was nowhere to be seen.

Continue reading →

Tom Little: The right choice for the job

1 Reply

I’m sure it’s a coincidence (paging Mr. Coriell), but Governor Shumlin chose today to announce his choice of independent investigator to look into Eternal General Bill Sorrell’s campaign finance activities. On a Friday, and on a Friday when a sitting State Senator did a perp walk after his arraignment on sex-crime charges.

But the hiring is noteworthy, and from all appearances, Shumlin made a fine choice. Tom Little appears to be above reproach in his personal conduct, and even-handed in his political dealings. The only drawback — and to some it’s a very significant one — is that he doesn’t have any experience as a prosecutor. His legal practice has mainly been in corporate and real estate law.

Little served ten years a Republican State Representative. He distinguished himself greatly in the fight for civil unions. In this age of widespread marriage equality, that might seem like ancient history; but it was only 15 years ago, and at the time it was a legal milestone and a red-hot controversy. An August 2000 profile piece by Seven Days’ Kevin Kelley called him “the single most influential figure in steering the [civil unions] legislation to narrow passage.” As chair of the House Judiciary Committee, Kelly writes, he “helped persuade other moderate Republicans to vote on their conscience, not their fears.”

He’s currently a top exec at the Vermont Student Assistance Corporation, and he’s got a list of public service activities as long as your arm. And someone with much more knowledge than I characterizes Little as a “straight shooter, non-corruptible.” But here’s the point where my cynicism threw in the towel: according to a bio I’ve seen, he “currently serves as Chancellor of the Episcopal Diocese of Vermont.”

Good grief. Who is this guy, the reincarnation of Jimmy Stewart?

I don’t know Tom Little, never met him. But apart from the lack of prosecutorial experience, it’s very hard to find any fault with the choice. Not bad for a Friday newsdump. (Sorry, Scott.)

Bill Sorrell willfully distorts the record

Leave a reply

h/t to Fiona Apple.

h/t to Fiona Apple.

On Tuesday morning, our beloved Eternal General made an appearance on WDEV’s Mark Johnson Show. Unlike last week’s sad excuse of an interview on VPR, Johnson actually grilled him long and hard on the questions surrounding his campaign finances.

But Johnson missed a big fat whopper that Sorrell told right off the top, and later repeated. I don’t blame Johnson for this; he’d have to have an amazing memory for two-year-old court rulings to have caught Sorrell’s dissembling.

At issue was the 2012 Democratic primary, and whether there was improper collusion between the Sorrell campaign and the Committee for Justice and Fairness, a Washington-based PAC that spent big on Sorrell just before the primary, which he won by a razor-thin margin.

Sorrell’s opponent in the 2012 general election, Republican Jack McMullen, filed a complaint against Sorrell, alleging improper collusion in the primary. Here’s how Sorrell characterized the disposition of that case:

I’m not guilty. The coordination with the Democratic AG’s Association, that was the subject of a lawsuit in Chittenden Superior Court filed against me back in 2012; the judge ruled in my favor.

He later restated his reading of the decision:

There was no violation there, my Republican opponent sued me and had no evidence to support that there was illegal collusion, and the Chittenden Superior Court ruled in my favor. Case over.

Well, actually, case NOT over.

In fact, the case was never investigated. It still hasn’t been investigated.

Continue reading →

Phil Scott asks some dumb questions

2 Replies

Apparently our humble & lovable Lieutenant Governor still has a bug up his butt about public financing of election campaigns. You may recall that Phil Scott had never uttered a word about public financing* until Dean Corren qualified for public funds last year, forcing Scott to actually put some effort into his campaign. The experience was traumatic enough that it birthed a “philosophical objection” to public financing in Scott’s mind.

*Correction: I’ve been informed that Scott has voiced objections on previous occasions. Sen. Joe Benning: ” I first heard him expressing his disagreement with public financing of campaigns when I met him back in 2010.” I thank the Senator for taking the time to write. I’d still like to know if Scott had ever expressed his disagreement on the public record, but clearly his concerns precede his 2014 campaign.

On Tuesday, Scott grabbed an opportunity to again state his “philosophical objection” to public financing, and raise a series of far-fetched questions about the law’s workings.

His testimony before the Senate Government Operations Committee drew no attention in the media because it was immediately followed by Attorney General Bill Sorrell’s appearance, in which he belatedly acquiesced to calls for an independent probe of his campaign finances. Yeah, that kinda overshadowed everything else.

Also, Scott’s remarks were immediately dismissed by the committee, which had convened to consider a single technical change in the law; there was no time for broader questions.

But before it vanishes into the mists of history, let’s recount some of Phil Scott’s testimony.

Continue reading →

VPR and Sorrell: It got worse

5 Replies

Okay, so Vermont Public Radio got my worst grade for its coverage — or should I say “complete absence of coverage” regarding the campaign finance scandal threatening to engulf Vermont Eternal General Bill Sorrell.

VPR didn’t even send a reporter to Tuesday’s Senate Government Operations Committee hearing, at which Sorrell reversed course and endorsed the idea of an independent investigation of his campaign activities. Something he had consistently refused to do since the fall of 2012, mind you.

And then today, the big guest on “Vermont Edition” was none other than Bill Sorrell himself.

I gave VPR its bottom-of-the-barrel grade before I head the Sorrell interview.

Now I have. And VPR just fell below the bottom of the barrel.

First of all, having devoted no perceptible airtime to the allegations against Sorrell, they give him the VPR platform for a solid half hour?

And then, even worse, they spend the first 20 minutes of the interview NOT talking about campaign finance, but the GMO labeling law and this week’s developments in the case. Jane Lindholm’s intro didn’t even mention Sorrell’s troubles; there was a single passing generic reference to “campaign finance.”

Talk about ignoring the elephant in the room. We have one of our top elected officials having to accept an independent investigation of his activities — something that has rarely or perhaps EVER happened in Vermont history — and you don’t lead with it? You didn’t even mention it?

Continue reading →

Somebody’s ethical compass needs a tune-up

1 Reply

Congratulations to Governor Shumlin for finding the time in his busy schedule to do something about Eternal General Bill Sorrell.

Like Sorrell, the Governor couldn’t see the seriousness of the situation on his own; he had to be dragged kicking and screaming. I hope his moral compass is truer in other areas, though I fear not.

Also, the next time he pleads a lack of time to deal with an inconvenient issue, we’ll know it’s bullshit.

But that’s not my primary topic for this missive. No, that would be the Vermont media’s widespread failure to address the Sorrell story until it smacked them between the eyes.

Not all are equally guilty, and I’ll offer a ranking below. But their failure in the Sorrell case is sadly typical of the Vermont media’s myopia when it comes to the foibles of the powerful. There’s a presumption of innocence, a reluctance to challenge, that’s uncharacteristic of the media at its best.

Let’s take John Campbell, for instance. In late February, Seven Days’ Terri Hallenbeck wrote about the Senate President Pro Tem having “quietly increased his office’s staffing and more than doubled his payroll.”

The response from the Vermont media? Crickets.

Admittedly the dollars involved are not large — we’re talking roughly $55,000 before and $110,000 after — but big stories have been spun out of smaller stuff. Usually involving a nameless functionary, not an elite officeholder. (Anybody ever hear of William Goggins until this month?)

Why did Campbell get a free pass? I have no idea, but it reflects poorly on our fourth-estate watchdogs.

Continue reading →

The Eternal General Strikes Back (Warning: SATIRE)

1 Reply

Y'know, this picture works with almost any song lyric.

Y’know, this picture works with almost any song lyric.

Vermont Attorney General Bill Sorrell, having come under intense criticism for his handling of campaign finance prosecutions and his own questionable compliance with the law, came out in true Two-Fisted Attorney General fashion late Friday.

(Warning: SATIRE.)

In a hastily-called news conference, Sorrell announced the filing of several new accusations against Dean Corren, last year’s Democratic and Progressive candidate for Lieutenant Governor.

Sorrell had previously charged Corren with violating the state’s public financing law by accepting tangible assistance from the Democratic Party, namely an email blast with an estimated value of $255. Sorrell’s proposed punishment for this crime: a total of $72,000 in fines and reimbursements.

“I have been accused of excessive zeal in this prosecution,” said Sorrell, a brace of assistant and deputy Attorneys General forming a semi-circle behind him. “To the contrary, I have uncovered even more violations by Mr. Corren. Taken together, they paint a clear and unmistakable picture of a rogue campaign.”

Among the new charges against Corren:

— At a Democratic State Committee meeting, Corren sneezed and a party official loaned him a handkerchief. “A tissue would have been within the bounds of the law,” noted Sorrell, “but a piece of haberdashery is clearly a significant gift that Mr. Corren could have potentially used throughout the remainder of his campaign.”

(Warning: more SATIRE… after the jump.)
Continue reading →