Setting the Bar for Corruption by George F. Will (Washington Post)

This is one of the sloppiest columns George Will has ever written. His intent here is twofold: (1) Link presidential candidate John Edwards to the corrupt law firm Milberg Weiss and (2) convince you that trial lawyers as a group are corrupt people. But to paraphrase Seinfeld, it is a column about nothing.

Let’s begin with Milberg Weiss. There is no connection between Edwards and Milberg Weiss. Furthermore, Will is smart enough to know there is no connection. He presents a juxtaposition of unrelated facts and events in which he hopes you, the reader, will conclude there is such a connection. Will writes ten paragraphs about all the illegal and unethical things Milberg Weiss has done over the years. Did you notice anything missing in those ten paragraphs? There is no mention of John Edwards. Isn’t that a significant omission if the point of this column is to make Edwards look like he is in bed with Milberg Weiss?

In fact, the only politician mentioned in connection to Milberg Weiss is former President Bill Clinton. Even so, Will’s example is seriously off point. He presents these three events:

1. Bill Lerach of Milberg Weiss was a Lincoln Bedroom guest in Bill Clinton’s White House.
2. Shortly after Lerach attended a White House dinner, Clinton vetoed legislation that would have restricted class-action lawsuits.
3. Lerach gave $100,000 to Clinton's presidential library.

Will’s inference is obvious—Clinton’s veto was somehow tied to Bill Lerach of Milberg Weiss. A casual reader of Will’s column might come to that conclusion. However, is it true? Rather, isn’t it true that Bill Clinton’s position on class-action lawsuits was established many years before he became president? Isn’t it true that Bill Clinton favored class-action lawsuits in the past, and still favors them today? So what does this have to do with Bill Lerach and Milberg Weiss? Or for that matter, what does it have to do with John Edwards? It is apropos of nothing.

Now, about those trial lawyers. Trial lawyers donate money to Democrats. Does George Will have a problem with that? Will says, “Since 1980, the firm's partners [of Milberg Weiss] have given more than $7 million to Democratic candidates and an additional $500,000 to help build the Democratic National Committee's new headquarters.” So what? Is that illegal? Is that unethical? If there is nothing wrong, why does Will mention these things in his column? Once again, it is apropos of nothing.

Will concludes with this statement: “Until Lerach pleaded guilty, he was a fundraiser for Edwards, for whom he collected $64,000 from lawyers in the firm he founded after he had a falling-out with Weiss.” Did you catch that? Lerach collected money for Edwards AFTER he left Milberg Wiess. At the time he raised $64,000 for Edwards, Lerach was associated with Lerach Coughlin Stoia & Robbins LLP of San Diego. Where is the connection to the corruption at Milberg Weiss?

I repeat: John Edwards has zero connection to Milberg Weiss. George Will has no business to insinuate otherwise.

As for politicians who take questionable money from interest groups, why single out Edwards and the trial lawyers? Are we supposed to believe that all trial lawyers are corrupt because of Milberg Weiss? Are we supposed to believe that Edwards is corrupt because some members of his key constituency are corrupt? George Will prides himself on his ability to think critically. However, in this column, he is asking his readers to abandon critical thinking and instead move from innuendo to conclusion.