Point By Point Analysis Of Matthew Whitaker's Wife's Zany, Rambling Email Defending Her Husband
A truly epic response.
Former Tight End Matt Whitaker
Some days, the comedy just writes itself. Or, more accurately, the wife of the not-technically-legitimate Acting Attorney General writes the comedy.
Last night, Mark Joseph Stern of Slate posted an article explaining that he’d just received an email from Marci Whitaker, wife of Matthew Whitaker taking him to task for an article he wrote with Dahlia Lithwick cataloging the many, many reasons Whitaker is comically unqualified to hold a clerical job at the Department of Justice, let alone its top post.
Raising The Bar in Bar Prep
Is this one of those times where the cure is worse than the disease? Yes, dear readers, it is.
Mr. Stern –
So far so good.
I understand the message that Slate wants to send its readers. You hate Trump – noted. I also understand that I cannot stop people from writing what they want, if they toss in a few words like “allegedly” or “likely”.
Sponsored
Legal Tech Buyer’s Guide For Legal Research And Other Core Tasks
Rise Above Redlines: How AI Is Setting A New Benchmark For Contracting
How 3 New Legal AI Tools Will Strengthen Firms
That’s not exactly how this works. You can’t say “Matthew Whitaker is allegedly behind the Pizzagate sex ring.” Those markers indicate that there are allegations backed by some measure of substantiation that could well prove wrong or legally insufficient to amount to a crime, but let people “write whatever they want.” She’s thinking of “with all due respect.” It’s in the Geneva Convention, look it up.
But I cannot understand the zeal in trying to destroy an individual who has done nothing to deserve this tearing down.
Ahem. If we just limit the universe of actions to “stuff he’s done since October” there’s more than enough to deserve this tearing down.
Are you hoping that all future appointees’ qualifications are to have sat at a desk and pushed paper around for 30 years?
Sponsored
Raising The Bar in Bar Prep
Like a committed career government servant instead of a political grandstander? Is this supposed to sound like a bad thing?
It is a small comfort to me that the people who will want to work with him in the future are, let’s hope, really unlikely readers of Slate and similar publications.
Yes, we live in a world of media silos and thankfully for Whitaker the people who will want to work with him are too busy watching Alex Jones.
I happen to like things about Slate and I’m also not a fire-breathing Republican dragon, so it does distress me somewhat to read these things. I have ignored a lot of it, because it is all innuendo and/or outright BS, but you should know this is just too much. If you have a conscience, I hope you will consider reporting in a more ethical and fair manner than this article demonstrates.
Fact check: *this* is outright BS. There are no gradations at this point. If you’re an apologist for a kleptocratic regime that tortures children, there’s no “oh, please don’t consider me a ‘hardcore’ Republican.” This effort to build rapport with Stern backed by vague assertions that maybe she breaks with the GOP on some undefined issue is so clumsy I wouldn’t be shocked to learn Mitt Romney wrote it.
Literally none of the awful things you and your co-author say are true.
Literally?
There is zero evidence that Matt is homophobic and if you knew how the US Attorney’s office worked and how multiple law enforcement agencies participated in the McCoy case, you would not print that. Mr. McCoy has for years attempted to spin it this way and it has never taken hold, except perhaps, to the very negatively motivated and gullible.
Was the McCoy prosecution — a Whitaker led joint that sought to convict Iowa’s first openly gay legislator — fueled by homophobia? We don’t know. What we do know is that the case was so laughably flimsy it got tossed by a jury in about two hours. When the federal government can’t win a criminal case with everything stacked in their favor you can say a lot of things about the prosecutorial office and none of them are flattering.
To imply that Matt had visibility and knowledge of $25 million dollars of wrongdoing is preposterous.
Being a paid board member of a company caught up in a $25 million fraud doesn’t necessarily mean Whitaker was aware of wrongdoing. It could have been shielded from him by officers of the company. On the other hand, when a board that doesn’t even attempt to perform its due diligence, that’s on them. So, no, it’s not “preposterous” to saddle Whitaker with some measure of responsibility here, especially when he actually saw and responded to the sorts of complaints that ended up unraveling the scheme.
Would you characterize a sternly worded letter as threatening? [note: obviously, yes, you did, but really?]
He told a victim of a scam that “there could be serious civil and criminal consequences” if the victim tried to fight back. That is actually the definition of the word “threatening.”
It was well-documented that Matt is a capable and affable person.
She does not include any of this documentation.
He was at the right hand of Sessions for over a year. But sure, imply that he got the current appointment because of something he said over a year prior before he worked for anyone. The particularly on television part – LOL. What does that even mean? Nothing, that’s what.
Over a year prior, a mostly unknown dude started aggressively raising his profile making dubious claims about Trump’s legal case and then got a job as the right-hand man of the Attorney General… for over a year.
Work through that sequence maybe, and see if it seems plausible.
Perhaps, Marci, you should work through the sequence. This isn’t exactly unprecedented for this administration. Kayleigh McEnany was a random law student before she started writing for Above the Law, got on CNN, made laughable claims about Trump’s greatness, and got appointed the spokesperson of the GOP. Talking heads have replaced the Office of Personnel Management.
It isn’t really or shouldn’t be that controversial to state that the Mueller investigation should stay within the parameters given.
Sure.
Particularly when that is said more than a year prior as the investigation is just beginning. Why would a person need to recuse oneself for that mild statement?
Mild statements like “calling it a witch hunt.” Whitaker also said back in 2017 that “Because I’m a former prosecutor, I know how investigations go, and I know that what we know publicly, there’s not enough for a case…” and as McCoy will tell you, Whitaker has some experience with there not being enough for a case!
As for Whitaker’s illegal appointment:
Oh, and I guess you missed that the Supreme Court decided not to take up the temporary appointment challenge. Most organizations had given up on that angle of attack quite a while ago. Kudos to your perseverance, misguided though it may be.
Look, she’s not a lawyer so she shouldn’t be expected to understand how this works. Maybe if she knew a competent federal prosecutor she could ask him for a primer.
Finally, I don’t know how you print that he is “lying” about the academic All-American thing, while yourself writing all of these untruths. It is truly bizarre. All of that has been explained, if you cared to find out.
It has been explained… he lied about being an academic All-American by pleading ignorance that his “District” academics honor was the same as one of the most prestigious awards in college sports.
Given your apparent mindset, I’m sure there are many ways for your [sic] to turn the mental cartwheels to justify this. Because Trump! It’s a simplistic ending to any discussion and absolves you of actual journalistic integrity. Because Trump! And integrity! And if he had a conscience himself he wouldn’t be there! That’s sarcasm, btw.
Thanks for clarifying.
PS this is my work email and phone. Please do not use it in any ill manner. I like my job and I need to continue to earn a living, particularly in light of this shutdown. Thanks!
Won’t someone think of the real victims of this shutdown?
That’s sarcasm, btw.
(Check out the full email on the next page…)
So, I Got an Email From Matthew Whitaker’s Wife [Slate]
Low Barr [Slate]
Joe Patrice is a senior editor at Above the Law and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer. Feel free to email any tips, questions, or comments. Follow him on Twitter if you’re interested in law, politics, and a healthy dose of college sports news. Joe also serves as a Managing Director at RPN Executive Search.
