4 MILLION VISITORS SERVED. EVERYWHERE SINCE 2009

Friday, March 23, 2018

Powerful progressive law firm plunks down $20,000 for Nancy O'Malley's campaign

Including donations from attorney Joe Cotchett
and his law firm, Alameda County DA Nancy 
O'Malley raised $27,200 in the past eight days.
ALAMEDA COUNTY DA
--ELECTION 2018--
The powerful Burlingame law firm of Cotchett, Pitre & McCarthy, LLP filed a lawsuit on behalf of a Facebook shareholder on Tuesday over the recent disclosure that the social media company failed to protect data from 50 million of its users in a story likely connected to the ongoing Russian collusion investigation.

It's not surprising that the firm's founder, Joe Cotchett, is involved in the case. In fact, he has a reputation for litigating many progressive causes, fighting for the so-called little guy against PG&E following the San Bruno explosion and Wells Fargo in the case of fraudulent bank accounts.

Cotchett was also briefly a candidate in 2016 for the appointment to replace Kamala Harris as state attorney general, and he represented the city of San Jose during its unsuccessful bid to lure the Oakland Athletics to the South Bay.

So, it is somewhat surprising that Cotchett, along with his partners, contributed $20,000 last week to an East Bay candidate, who most in the area readily do not view as very progressive.

Cotchett contributed $5,000 to Alameda County District Attorney Nancy O'Malley's re-election campaign on Mar. 14, according to finance reports. Partners, Frank Pitre, Niall McCarthy and an attorney at the firm, named Nanci Nishimura, also contributed $5,000 apiece.

Furthermore, between Mar. 14 and Mar. 22, O'Malley raised a total of $27,200. The large chunk of contributions includes $1,000 from the re-election campaign of Alameda County Sheriff Gregory Ahern.

The ability of O'Malley's campaign to draw heavily from police unions, attorneys from all over the Bay Area, including employees in her own office, continues to be a significant story line in her bid to outlast upstart campaign of Oakland civil rights attorney Pamela Price this June.

Conversely, Price's campaign has been boosted by an outpouring of support from progressives in Alameda County, who believe O'Malley is ambivalent toward convicting police officers for wrongdoing. But the money issue continues to persists for Price and is likely to continue in this expensive countywide primary.

By comparison, O'Malley's 8-day haul of $27,200 was nearly one-third of the total amount of campaign contributions Price received during the last six months of last year. While O'Malley raised $461,000 during all of 2017, Price received just $110,000.

8 comments:

  1. Yes, Nancy O'Malley cannot match Pamela Price on the progressiveness-meter when it comes to having vulnerable clients sign over movie rights as a condition of representation.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Toussaint L'OuvertureMarch 24, 2018 at 8:39 AM

    Of course, Anon, you are right. Nancy is the walking embodiment of the fact that Organized Labor can buy and control a politician and have the Democratic party and the left side progressives happy with their purchase: Nancy O'Malley. She does what they ask and no one will be able to defeat her in an election which she controls.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. want to unpack that a little bit?

      Delete
  3. By MW:

    A tomato by any other name is still a tomato, and a bribe is still a bribe even if you call it a large election campaign contribution.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. MW you are so right. Look what a fine tomato the Police Union bought.

      Delete
  4. By MW:

    Lawyers and law firms have a huge incentive to provide the big boys (and also the big girls) in the Alameda County DA's office with large bribes, and although undoubtedly some of those large bribes will be lightly disguised as so called election campaign contributions.

    In other words since the AC DA's office is a cesspool of lies, sleaze, fraud, and criminal activity, and also an organization dedicated to engaging in scripted, prearranged, and choreographed "investigations," and also has a history of having its lawyers secretly call in witnesses to crimes before the trial to choreograph testimony, AND THEN ALSO WARNING THOSE WITNESSES TO NEVER DISCLOSE THAT THOSE SECRET AND ILLEGAL MEETINGS EVER TOOK PLACE, therefore lawyers and law firms representing certain defendants are less likely to have their clients be victims of such illegal backroom fixes if they provided the crooked lawyers in the DA's office with money.

    (QUESTION: Is the term "crooked lawyer" redundant?)

    ReplyDelete
  5. I hope people read the East Bay Express article by Darwin Bond Graham about Pamela Price too. The article can be googled. It was Price who tried to get those story rights away from Guap according to the article.

    ReplyDelete
  6. By MW:

    In regard to the post of 11:34. Nancy O'Malley is definitely extremely sleazy and a crook.

    However a lot of people who seem to be much more familiar with Pamela Price than I am seem convinced that Pamela Price is also extremely sleazy and a crook. If they are correct, then perhaps the AC DA's office could borrow an idea from bigtime football. More specifically, in recent years it has become more and more common in bigtime sports, and especially football, to have both a head coach and a co- head coach, in other words a super assistant coach whose rank and position is almost on par with that of the head coach.

    So if Pamela Price, and just like Nancy O'Malley, is a sleazeball and a crooked lawyer, then it would be an extreme shame to deprive an organization as totally corrupt as the AC DA's office of the services of either one.

    (In fact every now and then I will even read about a situation in which two brothers are coaching a team as two totally equal head coaches.)

    So therefore, and so as to help continue the AC DA's office, and also AC government in general, as a huge and totally corrupt organized crime ring, perhaps we should install O'Malley and Pamela Price as co head DA's, and so that way we will not be denied the talents. honesty, and integrity of either one.

    ReplyDelete