Someone or something is funding Levy in his representation of Matt Walsh [merged]

[PATSNUTme]

Re: Publicity is funding Michael Levy in his representation of Matt Walsh [merged]

I changed the thread title.

But, I really think that he is being funded Dr. Evil.

 

[JoeSixPat]

Re: Publicity is funding Michael Levy in his representation of Matt Walsh [merged]

I changed the thread title.
]

Why?


Publicity? I don't get it.

The media? well not really - I know Comcast is sort of like the media but they are a communications conglomorate.

I think the point here is that there's a political agenda and a significant trail of campaign finance between Levy, his previous lawfirm, Comcast and other related interests and members of Capital Hill who might possibly have NFL related agenda items.

I'm confused as to why an effort to create a thread based on actual facts and data gets lumped in with an oddly titled thread that provides only unsubstantiated speculation - and then gets renamed again as "Publicity" rather than "Media" which also misses the mark but is closer to the nature of Comcast's interest in this.

What's up? Are we not allowed to look into matters related to Walsh's attorney on this board?

 

[PonyExpress]

Re: Publicity is funding Michael Levy in his representation of Matt Walsh [merged]

The altered title of this thread, stating that "publicity" is funding Walsh's lawyer, is based on pure speculation from Florio's rumor mill and should not be presented as fact.

Nowhere has Walsh's attorney admitted that "publicity" is payment for his services.

Personally, I believe it is a lie. I believe someone is paying him. Maybe the form of that payment is currying political favor with the head of the Senate judiciary committee. Maybe Spector then funnels political powerbrokers to the law firm. Maybe certain things are overlooked. Maybe they make deals while playing golf together in Rockville. Washington DC is a sewer.

But the idea that a lawyer at a power firm in DC is receiving "payment" from ESPN media coverage is a joke, and Florio knew it was a joke when he wrote it.

Another thing... Why any one on this site takes Florio at face value after the garbage he pulled SB sunday is beyond me. That anus actually alleged that so-called "Spygate" was "worse than the Black Sox scandal". He was as responsible for that garbage reaching fever pitch as any other media whore in America. Just cuz he kissed our collective Pats fan @$$ a couple times since with sop stories changes nothing. He was probably afraid of getting sued when the Walsh story turned bogus, so he decided to straddle the fence a bit to cover his own @$$.

 

[JoeSixPat]

Re: Publicity is funding Michael Levy in his representation of Matt Walsh [merged]

The altered title of this thread, stating that "publicity" is funding Walsh's lawyer, is based on pure speculation from Florio's rumor mill and should not be presented as fact.

Nowhere has Walsh's attorney admitted that "publicity" is payment for his services.

Yes - I was trying to get away from speculation and start a thread based on fact only.

Sadly its all been thrown in with unsubstantiated innuendo in a thread from last week that most people assume they've already read.

I might try to re-post it again in a thread that can at least now be titled "Walsh attorney has ties to Comcast" as his former lawfirm in fact does have ties to Comcast. That's new information near as I can tell as while its all easily verifiable with some simple internet searches, its not yet been reported.

That's not even remotely similar to "publicity" funding Levy - but raises further questions as to who is funding him and why - and the fact that his former lawfirm has strong ties to Comcast and spent $500,000 in campaign donations in the last several years alone should raise some eyebrows.

 

[PATSNUTme]

Re: Someone or something is funding Levy in his representation of Matt Walsh [merged

OK, I changed it to "someone or something". That should cover all the bases.

 

[otis p. driftwood]

Re: Someone or something is funding Levy in his representation of Matt Walsh [merged

OK, I changed it to "someone or something". That should cover all the bases.

Why not just have left it alone in the first place? Does everything have to be about you?

 

[Clonamery]

Re: Someone or something is funding Levy in his representation of Matt Walsh [merged

Why not just have left it alone in the first place? Does everything have to be about you?

Same could be said of you.

 

[JoeSixPat]

Re: Someone or something is funding Levy in his representation of Matt Walsh [merged

So a little more research shows that Swidler et al is a major telecommunications lawfirm with very strong fundraising ties to Capital Hill - that recently merged with the other aforementioned firm Bingham McCutchen LLP - making them a juggernaut when it comes to political donations (about $1 million in the 2004-2008 election cycles... see OpenSecrets.org)

http://www.newtelephony.com/news/63h11628315749.html

Swidler /Bingham McCutchen are also the lawyers for AT&T - which is owned by Comcast

http://www.usatoday.com/tech/techinvestor/2001/12/20/att-comcast.htm

If you search for Swidler /Bingham McCutchen and AT&T you'll actually find a long and broad amount of profitable litigation in matters involving the FCC (as opposed for searching for cases specifically mentioning Comcast) but again, Comcast owns AT&T so its all the same.

So to recap - Michael Levy - who was working for Comcast's lawfirm(s) & political donors Swidler/Bingham McCutchen as recently as 2005 (according to his political donations on OpenSecrets.org) is now representing a client who is embroiled in a matter closely linked to a pissing match between the NFL, Comcast and the FCC.

What financial, political or business interest Levy and his new lawfirm have in helping his former lawfirm(s) is unknown - but if anyone's looking for a link between Levy and Comcast, its right there to be found with just a relatively little amount of internet digging.

 

[otis p. driftwood]

Re: Someone or something is funding Levy in his representation of Matt Walsh [merged

Same could be said of you.

How do you figure? I have no power to change threat titles, merge threads or whatever.

And if I did, (when I did, having been a mod, admin and board owner) I always asked the thread starter before I just made a decision like that, as it only seemed fair.

So I guess your statement just baffles me.

 

[otis p. driftwood]

Re: Someone or something is funding Levy in his representation of Matt Walsh [merged

So a little more research shows that Swidler et al is a major telecommunications lawfirm with very strong fundraising ties to Capital Hill - that recently merged with the other aforementioned firm Bingham McCutchen LLP

http://www.newtelephony.com/news/63h11628315749.html

And as mentioned Bingham McCutchen's been just as, if not more prolific in campaign finance issues as Swidler

Swidler / Bingham McCutchen are also the lawyers for AT&T - which is owned by Comcast

http://www.usatoday.com/tech/techinvestor/2001/12/20/att-comcast.htm

If you search for Swidler / Bingham McCutchen and AT&T you'll actually find a long and broad amount of profitable litigation in matters involving the FCC (as opposed for searching for cases specifically mentioning Comcast) but again, Comcast owns AT&T so its all the same.

So to recap - Michael Levy - who was working for Comcast Lawfirm(s) & political donors Swidler/Bingham McCutchen as recently as 2005 is now representing a client who is embroiled in a matter closely linked to a pissing match between the NFL and Comcast.

What financial, political or business interest Levy and his new lawfirm have in helping his former lawfirm(s) is unknown - but if anyone's looking for a link between Levy and Comcast, its right there to be found with just a relatively little amount of internet digging.

AT&T Broadband merged with Comcast. Just to be clear, AT&T the phone company didn't.

 

[PATSNUTme]

Re: Someone or something is funding Levy in his representation of Matt Walsh [merged

This was posted by Rob0729 the thread starter:

Mods please change the title of the thread though.

Sorry.

There seems to be several different bugs crawling up different posters asses over the past couple of months. And this board has lost the fun that it use to be.

Let's hope that they crawl out before too long.

 

[JoeSixPat]

Re: Someone or something is funding Levy in his representation of Matt Walsh [merged

AT&T Broadband merged with Comcast. Just to be clear, AT&T the phone company didn't.

OK - but when we're talking Broadband we're talking cable/tv/internet, right? - which is the issue that Comcast is fighting with the NFL about re: the NFL network and the overall NFL monopoly

I guess what this boils down to is that Levy - as a white collar crime lawyer - was likely specifically chosen because he personally doesn't work directly on the corporate litigation involving all the major corporate entities with a stake in this... but the lawfirms that have paid, and do pay his salary do.

This missing piece of the puzzle is what, if any, interest his current lawfirm has in the clients of his former lawfirm. With mergers taking place among clients and lawfirms themselves all the time - and major corporate entities like Comcast also taking on new lawfirms for work themselves, it doesn't take an active imagination to think that there could well be some financial interest that McKee Nelson LLC has in all of this - but that might not come out until this episode is over and done with - at a time when no one is looking.

 

[JoeSixPat]

Re: Someone or something is funding Levy in his representation of Matt Walsh [merged

This was posted by Rob0729 the thread starter:

Mods please change the title of the thread though.

Sorry.

There seems to be several different bugs crawling up different posters asses over the past couple of months. And this board has lost the fun that it use to be.

Let's hope that they crawl out before too long.

I think the thread title is just fine now. Thanks

 

[otis p. driftwood]

Re: Someone or something is funding Levy in his representation of Matt Walsh [merged

This was posted by Rob0729 the thread starter:

Mods please change the title of the thread though.

Sorry.

There seems to be several different bugs crawling up different posters asses over the past couple of months. And this board has lost the fun that it use to be.

Let's hope that they crawl out before too long.

Maybe a couple of those bugs/butts belong to some mods, too?



You're right though, and I apologize for my part this morning.

 

[otis p. driftwood]

Re: Someone or something is funding Levy in his representation of Matt Walsh [merged

OK - but when we're talking Broadband we're talking cable/tv/internet, right? - which is the issue that Comcast is fighting with the NFL about re: the NFL network and the overall NFL monopoly

I guess what this boils down to is that Levy - as a white collar crime lawyer - was likely specifically chosen because he personally doesn't work directly on the corporate litigation involving all the major corporate entities with a stake in this... but the lawfirms that have paid, and do pay his salary do.

This missing piece of the puzzle is what, if any, interest his current lawfirm has in the clients of his former lawfirm. With mergers taking place among clients and lawfirms themselves all the time - and major corporate entities like Comcast also taking on new lawfirms for work themselves, it doesn't take an active imagination to think that there could well be some financial interest that McKee Nelson LLC has in all of this - but that might not come out until this episode is over and done with - at a time when no one is looking.

I wasn't arguing, I just wanted to clarify the point. Carry on, I think you're doing a fine job!

 

[JoeSixPat]

Re: Someone or something is funding Levy in his representation of Matt Walsh [merged

I wasn't arguing, I just wanted to clarify the point. Carry on, I think you're doing a fine job!

No - I know you weren't... just trying to make sure I'm seeing this straight as well.

I'm sure with some more digging one can truly establish additional links between Swidle/Bingham McCutchen

If that's where the connection to Walsh originates from it will be all the more interesting as Levy went out of his way to establish that the contact with Walsh comes by way of someone who was doing legal work with the PATRIOTS - which tends not to make a whole lot of sense.

Unless the lawfirm had a major falling out with the Patriots and wants nothing to do with them anymore, what interest would they have in hooking up a disgruntled ex-employee with a top tier white collar politically connected DC lawyer? They'd be stabbing the Patriots in the back by doing so.

Seems more likely to me that the connection with Levy has roots with Comcast - and indeed Levy's former firm couldn't have stronger connections with Comcast and Capital Hill if they tried.

And I'm more prone to believe that Levy's interest is more connected to his current lawfirms' interest in big time corporate clients more than I would believe Levy himself is interested in self-promotion.

 

[otis p. driftwood]

Re: Someone or something is funding Levy in his representation of Matt Walsh [merged

No - I know you weren't... just trying to make sure I'm seeing this straight as well.

I'm sure with some more digging one can truly establish additional links between Swidle/Bingham McCutchen

If that's where the connection to Walsh originates from it will be all the more interesting as Levy went out of his way to establish that the contact with Walsh comes by way of someone who was doing legal work with the PATRIOTS - which tends not to make a whole lot of sense.

Unless the lawfirm had a major falling out with the Patriots and wants nothing to do with them anymore, what interest would they have in hooking up a disgruntled ex-employee with a top tier white collar politically connected DC lawyer? They'd be stabbing the Patriots in the back by doing so.

Seems more likely to me that the connection with Levy has roots with Comcast - and indeed Levy's former firm couldn't have stronger connections with Comcast and Capital Hill if they tried.

And I'm more prone to believe that Levy's interest is more connected to his current lawfirms' interest in big time corporate clients more than I would believe Levy himself is interested in self-promotion.

That's the problem I have with the whole thing. Someone said earlier that it was no big deal, all these high priced lawyers did pro-bono work, good for their reputations blah blah...that's fine, I know it's true, but why this lawyer? Why a Washington insider? Why not a high powered lawyer in HI? Or some big-wig in Boston?

Or a Providence mob lawyer (just kidding...).

 

[BSR]

Re: Someone or something is funding Levy in his representation of Matt Walsh [merged

Let's just assume that it turns out that Comcast is in fact paying Levy's bill. So? It doesn't really have any bearing on whether Walsh has a tape. It also isn't illegal or even immoral for that matter. It might show where Comcast's stance is toward the NFL, but other then that what does it matter?

 

[Funktopus]

Re: Someone or something is funding Levy in his representation of Matt Walsh [merged

Let's just assume that it turns out that Comcast is in fact paying Levy's bill. So? It doesn't really have any bearing on whether Walsh has a tape. It also isn't illegal or even immoral for that matter. It might show where Comcast's stance is toward the NFL, but other then that what does it matter?

Cuz then all those sanctimonious douchbags in the media can take thier high-road and shove it up thier @sses.

 

[JoeSixPat]

Re: Someone or something is funding Levy in his representation of Matt Walsh [merged

Let's just assume that it turns out that Comcast is in fact paying Levy's bill. So? It doesn't really have any bearing on whether Walsh has a tape. It also isn't illegal or even immoral for that matter. It might show where Comcast's stance is toward the NFL, but other then that what does it matter?

Because it proves that this whole charade has nothing to do with a suddenly discovered desire to prevent signal stealing in the NFL after 50 years of allowing it

Because it proves that anything Walsh, his attorneys and Senator Specter says and does has nothing to do with the GAME of football - but has everything to do with the BUSINESS of football.

Because it would prove that there's corruption in CONGRESS rather than in the NFL, making this issue significantly more important than discovering which teams are turning their cameras to the sidelines instead of just the field.

In short, the irony of seeing a witch hunt backfire to expose corruption in government would be poetic.