"My Gump, my Gump, my lovely Akin Gump. Check it out...."

What's going on at Akin Gump? That seems to be what many of you are wondering, based on some comments posted to a recent open thread featuring the firm:

"What is happening to Akin Gump DC? I saw that a bunch of lit partners just left."

"I've heard the same thing.... Akin appears to be losing tons of partners and the DC office is rumored to be in turmoil. It does, however, have Tom Goldstein, which is sure to attract gunners who think they'll be arguing cases in three years."

"I read somewhere that the changes at Akin are part of some larger strategic plan. Anyone know anything about that?"

As a matter of fact, yes -- Kim Eisler does. He writes, over at Washingtonian:

Over the past few months, 950-lawyer Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld has lost about 45 lawyers, including two of its rainmakers, Michael Madigan and Richard Wyatt Jr. Tensions are said to be high, with partners in the New York office unhappy that the Washington lawyers are not producing their share of revenue. To increase productivity, Akin Gump pushed out 5 percent of its lawyers who, in management's view, were not generating enough income. The firm also closed its office in Taipei, one of 12 it maintained outside of Washington, and insiders predict the money-losing Beijing office will be next to go. The China offices have been expensive failures in the eyes of New York partners, who are pressing Washington to stop the bleeding....

The firm still has several stars, including criminal-defense lawyers John Dowd and Michele Roberts, Supreme Court litigator Tom Goldstein, and lobbying-practice head Joel Jankowsky, and is counting on them to pull Akin Gump out of its tailspin.

These boldface names are familiar to the ATL readership. John Dowd is the defense lawyer of Monica Goodling (and the former boss of the Akin Gump Escort). Tom Goldstein, the celebrated SCOTUS litigator, was a judge on ATL Idol.

To read more about comings and goings at Akin Gump, check out Eisler's complete piece, available over here.

Clock Is Ticking for Strauss's Firm [Capital Comment / Washingtonian]

Earlier: Fall Recruiting Open Thread: Vault 31-40 (2009)

Earlier this year, we devoted extensive coverage to the Akin Gump Escort. She was the legal secretary at Akin Gump who worked for powerhouse lawyer John Dowd by day, and alleged D.C. madam Deborah Jeane Palfrey by night.

Courtesy of WTOP, we now know more about the close working relationship between the Akin Gump Escort and the D.C. Madam:

"Why did you do this to me? I never did anything to you."

That accusatory two-sentence e-mail from alleged D.C. madam Deborah Jeane Palfrey to an escort she considered her "little sister" and one of her most trusted confidantes came moments after Palfrey realized her assets had been frozen by the U.S. Department of the Treasury.

"My first thought because of the timing was that (Jennifer) was working with the government," writes Palfrey, in a series of e-mails to WTOP.

"Jennifer" was the name escort customers knew for a legal secretary at Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld, a prominent D.C. law firm. The woman was fired in May 2007, shortly after revealing to the firm that she had moonlighted for Palfrey's Pamela Martin & Associates between 2002 and 2006.

Fired? She should have been promoted, due to her intimate knowledge of servicing clients.

More discussion after the jump.

This is a continuation of our earlier post, in which we kicked off our liveblogging of the Monica Goodling testimony before the House Judiciary Committee.

11:00: Some friendly questioning from Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX), Ranking Republican Member of the Judiciary Committee. We once sat next to him at a dinner party; he's a very nice man.

11:05: Rep. Linda Sanchez (D-CA) is a style nightmare. White blazer, red tank-toppy-looking blouse. Congresswoman Sanchez: this is the United States Congress, not a July 4th booze cruise.

11:07: In terms of her demeanor, Goodling is not going down the diva route. She's very polite and helpful, interspersing her remarks with self-effacing or nervous smiles. It seems that she's trying to be as forthcoming as possible as a witness.

Discussion resumes after the jump.

Apparently we weren't the only ones who got blue balls from felt cheated by 20/20's report last Friday on the alleged DC madam, Deborah Jeane Palfrey. Professor Ann Althouse writes:

Were you, like me duped into watching "20/20" last night to hear what names they'd name based on the big list forked over to them by Deborah Jeane Palfrey, who's accused of running a prostitution ring in Washington?

“Our decision at the end was not to name any names,” said Brian Ross, the news correspondent who presented the segment. Mr. Ross said that the network went with a “conservative approach,” and that “based on our reporting it turned out not to be as newsworthy as we thought in terms of the names.”

At least they're being honest -- it seems -- in not pretending they'd belatedly discovered some ethical compunction about it.

Like Professor Althouse, we were also duped, seduced by ABC's advertising promising a salacious broadcast. We rushed home from a party on Friday night so we wouldn't miss the 20/20 special report, which we were expecting to be sensational. We were disappointed.

Sigh. Well, at least there was a shout-out to the Akin Gump escort:

Sometimes when Palfrey was unavailable [to answer the phones], a legal secretary at one of Washington's top law firms, Akin Gump, would handle the calls as well as go out on calls herself.

Using her e-mail account at Akin Gump, the secretary told Palfrey why she wanted to be an escort: "A day a week would be fun and spa money."

And from an ATL source, here's more gossip about the Akin Gump Escort, a former secretary to powerhouse partner John Dowd, the criminal defense lawyer now representing Monica Goodling:

This secretary likes to shop at high-end stores. She also drives luxury vehicles.

An escort with a weakness for fashion and the finer things? Color us surprised.

This could, however, be advantageous for Monica Goodling. If we were John Dowd, we'd instruct the Akin Gump Escort to take Monica Goodling shopping for a new suit, before Goodling's anticipated congressional testimony.

Brian Ross Reports on the D.C. Madam [ABC News / 20/20]
ABC fakes us out about naming names [Althouse]

Here are two quick updates to our earlier coverage of Akin Gump, the prestigious D.C. law firm, where an assistant to alleged D.C. madam Deborah Jeane Palfrey worked as a legal secretary. The second of these updates is nothing short of mind-blowing.

1. As a commenter pointed out, Tom Goldstein, the head of Akin Gump's Supreme Court practice, just posted an "opening" for a "special assistant." This led some to wonder: Could the madam-in-training have worked for the Supreme Court superstar?

It wouldn't be THAT suprising. The job announcement (PDF) mentions that an appreciation for poker is helpful. And we're guessing that the secretary-cum-escort has some familiarity with that game -- or a certain variant thereof.

Sadly, however, it turns out that there is no relation between these two events. According to a source at the firm, "this opening is completely unrelated to that situation.."

2. We believe our source. We've learned that the Akin Gump temptress worked for someone even more senior at the firm -- and even more powerful.

We have confirmed, with knowledgeable sources, what was previously rumored in reader comments. The Akin Gump Escort worked for John M. Dowd, the high-powered head of the firm's criminal litigation group. From his firm bio:

Mr. Dowd has prosecuted and defended significant criminal matters at trial and in parallel proceedings before Congress and regulatory agencies for more than 30 years. His practice focuses on the trial of complex civil and criminal cases.

Mr. Dowd is noted for his representation of a U.S. district judge, a former U.S. attorney and two U.S. senators. In addition, he represented a U.S. governor in a lengthy, high-profile criminal trial involving 23 counts charging false statements, wire fraud and attempted extortion.

A judge, a U.S. attorney, some senators? YAWN. John Dowd currently represents one of Above the Law's favorite celebrities: MONICA GOODLING!!!

Does this mean that telephone and/or face-to-face conversations took place between (1) the Magnificent Monica Goodling, of U.S. Attorneygate fame, and (2) the Akin Gump Escort? Presumably Monica Goodling had to interact with the Akin Gump Escort, whenever she called John Dowd on the phone, or came to his office for a meeting.

Please excuse us for a moment. Our head is about to explode, due to fabulosity overload!!!

More discussion, after the jump.

Some of you have taken issue with our worship of Monica Goodling, the Justice Department lawyer who finds herself at the center of the firestorm over the U.S. Attorney firings. We've praised her as an up-and-coming DOJ diva; but some of you have argued that a true diva wouldn't take the Fifth.

Fair enough; and normally we might agree. But Goodling isn't hiding behind the Fifth Amendment like a shrinking violet. Instead, she is invoking it boldly, defiantly. And she's going on the offensive against the Democrats who have cast aspersions on her simply for availing herself of constitutional protections.

From the Washington Post:

In a letter to House Democrats, Goodling's attorneys lambasted Rep. John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.) and his counterpart in the Senate, Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.), for questioning whether Goodling was hiding criminal activity by refusing to testify before Congress.

Attorneys John M. Dowd and Jeffrey King wrote that Goodling's assertion of her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination "can in no way be interpreted to suggest that Ms. Goodling herself participated in any criminal activity."

"Your and Senator Leahy's recent suggestions to the contrary are unfortunately reminiscent of Senator Joseph McCarthy, who infamously labeled those who asserted their constitutional right to remain silent before his committee 'Fifth Amendment Communists,'" the attorneys wrote.

Yeah, that's kinda awesome. Chairman Conyers, have you no sense of decency?

Attorneys for Gonzales Aide Criticize Congressional Democrats [Washington Post]

(No, not THAT Monica -- it's a bit late for that, dontcha think?)

Breaking news from Bloomberg:

Monica Goodling, a counsel to U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales who helped coordinate the dismissals of eight U.S. attorneys, will invoke her constitutional right not to answer Senate questions about the firings, her lawyer said.

Goodling, one of four Justice Department officials the agency said could be interviewed by the Senate Judiciary Committee, will invoke her Fifth Amendment privilege not to answer the panel's questions, John M. Dowd, her lawyer, said in a statement. Dowd said the committee had requested her testimony under oath.

The Associated Press also has a story, available here.

We're going to play unfrozen caveman legal commentator, and ask: Based on what we currently know about the U.S. Attorney firings, how could Goodling's testimony expose her to criminal liability, to place her in a position to invoke the Fifth Amendment? What are we missing here?

Here's what her lawyer, John Dowd, has to say about the matter. From the AP:

The potential for taking the blame for the department's bungled response "is very real," Dowd said. "One need look no further than the recent circumstances and proceedings involving Lewis Libby," he said, a reference to the recent conviction of Vice President Dick Cheney's former chief of staff in the CIA leak case.

The lesson we took away from the Libby case was: "Don't lie under oath."

So doesn't Dowd's argument prove too much? What does Goodling have to worry about as long as she testifies truthfully?

P.S. We have nothing against the DOJ or the White House under the current Administration. To paraphrase the classic defense against charges of racism, "Some of our best friends are [Bushies]!!!"

We're just confused, that's all. Clearly there were some screw-ups here. But is anyone (aside from Daily Kos types) seriously arguing that the underlying conduct was criminal?

Gonzales Aide Won't Answer Questions About Prosecutor Firings [Bloomberg]
Gonzales Aide to Invoke Fifth Amendment [Associated Press]