— from Nicholas Power —

I have had absolutely no involvement in any way, at any time, with Mr. Morgan’s campaign activities. I have, however, successfully represented Mr. Morgan in several pieces of campaign finance litigation.

I understand that Mr. Dehlendorf does not “like” Mr. Morgan because Mr. Morgan reported a Political Action Committee for which Mr. Dehlendorf was the treasurer to the Attorney General for various campaign finance violations. That PAC was then found to have been in violation as alleged and was fined by the AGO. (I might note, I was not at all involved with that case either and learned of it only after its conclusion).

It is a fact of life for attorneys that in many instances parties blame the attorneys associated with opposing parties for their legal troubles. This is what is happening here. Mr. Dehlendorf is conflating the values and beliefs of his political adversary with those of his adversary’s attorney.

Attorneys are hired to represent the interests of their clients and present cases based on fact and law. Indeed, the rules that govern the practice of law require us to represent our clients’ interests without substituting our own interests and preferences for theirs. This is required by law.

I have represented hundreds of clients with hugely differing political viewpoints — from extremely conservative to extremely liberal. Were I to somehow “adopt” my clients’ world views and political beliefs as my own I would literally be schizophrenic. Rather I do what all ethical attorneys do — represent as best I can the interest of my client.

Make no mistake, I have been a life-long Democrat. Indeed I was, in fact, a delegate for Bernie Sanders in 2016 — and still have the faded bumperstickers on the family car to prove it. But I fear that Mr. Dehlendorf’s required orthodoxy is precisely the sort of exclusionary sentiment that is at the root of the party’s recent stumbles.

Underlying Mr. Dehlendorf’s critique is a presumption that the Office of Prosecuting Attorney should be wielded as some sort of partisan tool. To me this is the anathema of what the philosophy of the Office should be. That is it should be to prosecute and advise without regard to partisan or political interests.

The fact that I have successfully and faithfully represented parties from across the political spectrum is exactly what qualifies me to discharge the duties of the office faithfully and in the furtherance of justice.

**If you are reading theOrcasonian for free, thank your fellow islanders. If you would like to support theOrcasonian CLICK HERE to set your modestly-priced, voluntary subscription. Otherwise, no worries; we’re happy to share with you.**