What was he thinking? Part III

March 25, 2011
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

I’m thinking this may become a regular feature on the blog – questioning attorneys’ decision-making skills.

A deputy in the Johnson County prosecutor’s office resigned Thursday after admitting he sent an e-mail from his personal account to Gov. Scott Walker of Wisconsin suggesting the governor stage some kind of attack on himself to discredit the public unions. Carlos Lam sent the e-mail in February urging the governor not to give in to the union demands. The e-mail came to light after The Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism found it through an open-records lawsuit settlement.

In it, Lam told the governor that he is an Indiana public employee and has been involved in GOP politics in Indiana for 18 years. If he would have left the e-mail at that, he’d probably still have a job.

But instead, Lam went on to suggest Walker employ a “false flag” operation. “If you could employ an associate who pretends to be sympathetic to the unions’ cause to physically attack you (or even use a firearm against you), you could discredit the public unions.”

“Use a firearm against you?” Wow.

Does Lam think it’s in anyone’s best interest for the governor to be shot at or possibly take a bullet in order to make the unions look bad?

According to media reports, Lam initially denied writing the e-mail and said someone must have hacked into his account. Later he admitted to writing it and resigned.

Lam’s e-mail and resignation come just a few weeks after an attorney in the Indiana Attorney General’s Office was fired after making the comment on Twitter to “use live ammunition” on protestors in the Wisconsin capitol building.

Lam has been admitted to practice in Indiana since 2002, according to the Indiana Roll of Attorneys. His status is active in good standing and he has no prior or pending discipline.

ADVERTISEMENT
  • Really?
    What a loser!
    • Really?
      When adults think firearms are the answer to disputes, how can we be surprised when a teenager, with presumably less judgment, uses a gun against a fellow student with whom he has a disagreement? It's a sad state of affairs.

    Post a comment to this story

    COMMENTS POLICY
    We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
     
    You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
     
    Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
     
    No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
     
    We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
     

    Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

    Sponsored by
    ADVERTISEMENT
    1. Major social engineering imposed by judicial order well in advance of democratic change, has been the story of the whole post ww2 period. Contraception, desegregation, abortion, gay marriage: all rammed down the throats of Americans who didn't vote to change existing laws on any such thing, by the unelected lifetime tenure Supreme court heirarchs. Maybe people came to accept those things once imposed upon them, but, that's accommodation not acceptance; and surely not democracy. So let's quit lying to the kids telling them this is a democracy. Some sort of oligarchy, but no democracy that's for sure, and it never was. A bourgeois republic from day one.

    2. JD Massur, yes, brings to mind a similar stand at a Texas Mission in 1836. Or Vladivostok in 1918. As you seemingly gloat, to the victors go the spoils ... let the looting begin, right?

    3. I always wondered why high fence deer hunting was frowned upon? I guess you need to keep the population steady. If you don't, no one can enjoy hunting! Thanks for the post! Fence

    4. Whether you support "gay marriage" or not is not the issue. The issue is whether the SCOTUS can extract from an unmentionable somewhere the notion that the Constitution forbids government "interference" in the "right" to marry. Just imagine time-traveling to Philadelphia in 1787. Ask James Madison if the document he and his fellows just wrote allowed him- or forbade government to "interfere" with- his "right" to marry George Washington? He would have immediately- and justly- summoned the Sergeant-at-Arms to throw your sorry self out into the street. Far from being a day of liberation, this is a day of capitulation by the Rule of Law to the Rule of What's Happening Now.

    5. With today's ruling, AG Zoeller's arguments in the cases of Obamacare and Same-sex Marriage can be relegated to the ash heap of history. 0-fer

    ADVERTISEMENT