Can You Hear Me NOW?
The NYT’s blockbuster story on Brent Wilkes is most interesting, IMO, for the delicate dance of threat and technical legal denial it portrays. Wilkes leaves little doubt as to why he agreed to the interview.
Ms. Luque said her clientâ€™s legal problems were a battle that he â€œwill fight and win.â€
Shesaid federal prosecutors told her in January that they were notinterested in Mr. Wilkesâ€™s dealings with Mr. Lowery and Mr. Lewis.â€œCunningham couldnâ€™t have followed through on what he did without thecooperation of other people on the committee,â€ Ms. Luque said.Prosecutors should be looking at the entire committee, she said.
And notice that Ms. Luque doesn’t even say that Wilkes plans to "fight and win" this in the courts. Heck, she doesn’t even say who this is a battle against, the law or Wilkes’ former associates, Lowery and Lewis. Meanwhile, Wilkes claims he believes Lowery and Lewis haven’t broken the law. But then he describes Lowery making threats that reveal a clear quid pro quo.