Atlanta attorney Harry MacDougald is our old Rathergate friend. He helped us get the ball rolling in “The 61st minute” on the morning of September 9, 2004. Writing under the screen name Buckhead, Harry observed in comment number 47 of Free Republic’s Rathergate thread: “I am saying these documents are forgeries, run through a copier for 15 generations to make them look old. This should be pursued aggressively.” Life has never been quite the same since we took his cue and followed up.
Harry is the managing partner of Atlanta’s Caldwell, Carlson, Elliott & DeLoach law firm. He represents defendant Jeffrey Clark in the “conspiracy so immense” case brought by Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis. We have followed defendants’ motion to disqualify Willis from prosecuting the case. It turns out that Willis appointed her boyfriend Nathan Wade as special prosecutor in the case. Willis, Wade, and others have testified under oath on the facts underlying the conflict issues raised by defendants. I commented, most recently, in “Whole lotta lyin’ goin’ on.”
Yesterday Judge Scott McAfee held a three-hour hearing for oral argument by the attorneys on the disqualification motion. Harry was the star of the show. His thirteen-minute argument begins at 01:12:40 of the video of the hearing at the bottom. Students of ancient history may recall the role of CBS News in Rathergate. It has posted a decent account of the hearing.
I have my doubts that Judge McAfee will grant the disqualification motion, but I have no doubt that he should or that Harry accurately captured the essence of the evidence before the court. Referring to the Office of the Fulton County District Attorney and the Willis/Wade matter, Harry concluded: “This office is a global laughingstock because of their conduct.”
I reached out to Harry for a comment after the hearing yesterday. He declined to comment one way or the other on the hearing, although he did comment favorably on Power Line. My comment is that Harry was right about Rathergate and he is right about the disgrace to be resolved by the court on the pending motion.
Notice: All comments are subject to moderation. Our comments are intended to be a forum for civil discourse bearing on the subject under discussion. Commenters who stray beyond the bounds of civility or employ what we deem gratuitous vulgarity in a comment — including, but not limited to, “s***,” “f***,” “a*******,” or one of their many variants — will be banned without further notice in the sole discretion of the site moderator.