Cicero,

YOU DON'T SAY?!?

This would be amazing.

please bring me up to speed, who's this "Big Litigator Man"?

Anonymous and pkoso:

Sorry; you've reached a bunch of inside-baseball chatter by employees of the Voting Section, for which Tanner worked.

Big Litigator Man is another, widely disliked (partly for the racist, sexist comments indicated) Voting Section lawyer.

*Grabs Beef and Broccoli dinner and a Clear Fruit flavored water*

Oh, this is gonna be good!!!

Damn, Bigger, you're making me hungry!

Anonymous, if I'm correct, this is the first time this comment has been disclosed in public...you've just made breaking news.

Sorry, Ice, but I'm starving. I haven't had anything to eat since breakfast....

I think I'm starting to understand why Obama Girl developed a crush on him and made that song now, LOL. I think I'm coming down with a case of man-crush on Obama....

pkoso, anonymous,

something about Barry Scholtzman; allegations of sexual harassment, racial discrimination.

My understanding of it.

Sholtzman is preparing himself to evade American justice! (LOL)In fatherland!

Personally, he disgusts me, like the rest of the crime family.

I wonder if they would be interested in investigating the illegal performance appraisal that Yvette Rivera wrote on behalf against the only remaining objector of the GA ID team, criticizing this career individual's work on the project that was completed prior to Ms. Rivera's employment with the DOJ. Hmmm, writing performance appraisals when you haven't been in your position long enough to be authorized to do so pursuant to OPM policy and the bargaining unit agreement, assessing work based on political bias and not substantive fact, and refusing to give employees information contained in their personnel file... seems pretty problematic to me. It looks like a lot more housecleaning is necessary.

Now this could be a real crucial development - a Democratic front runner for President actually starting to take the electoral fight directly to BushCo on a key issue ie voter caging vis a vis racial profiling .IF Senator Obama can make BushCo malfeasenace generally a campaign issue -then we have got a real live viable candidate.
ThE Democratic Base is seething for some leadership- we are all demanding that we immediately start taking on the Neo Cons . We could make EACH & EVERY GOP scandal a campaign issue. Its to use a tired old phrase "a target rich environment " Take your pick -cooking the books on climate change , turning ex Governor Segilmann into a political prisoner. The MZM , Wilkes ,Abramoff Scandal reaches right into Cheney's office for crying out loud .
please please Sen Obama lets get after 'em - lets not do like John Kerry did in 2004 -lets show some initiative - lets show some leadership !

Keep it coming, people! Rivera actually dropped that employee's overall rating for that period. If memory serves me correct, the proper evaluator resigned rather than give in to Rivera's request that she downgrade this employee's evaluation. Rivera had not been in the Section long enough to evaluate any staff. Yet somehow she did...these people do what they want, when they want, with no respect for policy. The union is well aware of this, and it is well-documented. Maybe an OPR needs to be started against Rivera.

There are folks who are probably new to the section or young that think Tanner got a raw deal. If you think that you should talk to the 24 people over the years who's lives and careers have been ruined by John Tanner. Talk to
the current housing section chief. Talk to Bob Berman, David Becker, even Becky Wertz got shafted by his games. There are few people he hasn't lied about at some point to sully them, overtly or subtly. There are people who think this was just political, a game played in Washington. In part you are right. But this is a game Tanner has played for a decade - to stick knives in people's backs without them knowing where it came from. This isn't about egos or office politics. This was about ruined careers. People having to uproot their lives and family and move across the country because a Section Chief told lies about them. This is about people laboring for years and not being promoted because a Section Cheif made up stories about them and whispered the stories to managers that wouldn't know any better or heard what they wanted to hear. This is about shody lawyering resulting in the humilating loss of a high profile 203 case and then the world discovering that the lead attorney was building sandcastles at the beach all summer while collecting THOUSANDS in expenses and taking no vacation. This is about so much more than the man who likes to come around and pat you on the back will ever admit. It would be right for him to apologize to everyone, not to glad hand. But we all know how good he is at apologizing. If you are young and really didn't understand what was going on, just realize you saw that Karma exists, even insided the beltway.

Tanner told lies about me too. He never thought they'd get back to me. Susana also told lies about me that got back to me. I'll never forget it.

Big Litigator Man apparently also committed an assult on another lawyer in the section. I heard it wasn't reported and just brushed off. But I heard that he up and cold cocked one of the older attorneys. Maybe someone knows more about this.

Bunch of pro-black faggots all of ya...

Hey Bigger/Ron:

Don't do her the honor of calling her a deputy chief. She ain't. She's a special litigation counsel that didn't have the qualifications to be named deputy. I suspect the much ballyhoooed "Acting Deputy" nonsense is about to come to an abrupt end.

It ain't no accident the Actors were so shook up an teary-eyed today.

Who is Ron Jeremy?

Ron Jeremy = real life porn star

All I know is that Bob Berman must be sitting in Capital Hill somewhere, laughing his head off tonight. Karma does exist! I wonder if before leaving, Tanner took himself to coffee.

Good one, Bigger. We can call him No-Back-Bone (as opposed to Wish Bone, Lazy Bone, Crazy Bone or Busy Bone for those of you unfamiliar with the rap group Bone Thugs in Harmony), since he could not even man up and admit what he said about that analyst.

Big Litigator Man is a devout Catholic who keeps rosary beads in his office...what a hypocrit he is.

Geez, they let guys like that into law school? And from law school into a cushy, high-prestige jobs in the Voting Section? He makes Michael Vick, Ron Artest and Stephen Jackson seem like pussycats in comparison. At least they never decked any of their teammates, LOL....

Change Your Stanky Ways

Get lost with your tripe. Go over to the WH and get down on your knees.

Shout out to Savage and Cicero. Wish I knew who you guys/gals were, because I'd like to buy you both a beer.

> It ain't no accident the Actors were so shook up an teary-eyed today.

The Actors and Big Man Litissaulter probably believe this crap (from the AP story...TPM won't let me post links tonight for some reason...go to Google News and enter Tanner's name):

"John Tanner, a longtime attorney in the department's Civil Rights division, requested the move from the division's voting rights office, Justice spokesman Peter Carr said. Tanner now works in the Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair Employment Practices, Carr said.

'Mr. Tanner made the decision to pursue this opportunity on his own accord,' Carr said in a statement."

Bigger -- you'd be surprised at what they let into law school. Heck, they let Tanner, Lorenzo-Giguere, and Rivera in. Tells you it doesn't take a supergenius to memorize a torts outline.

The LOT of them are liars: Tanner, Lorenzo-Giguere, Rivera, O'Donnell, and a couple more whose names I won't name, but you folks know who I'm talking about.

> It might have been Bob L, Chris H or Brian H

I don't think Colonel Lowell would have put up with being sucker punched. Hell, he might have shown Chickenhawk O'Donnell a thing or two from his combat training. Plus which, O'Donnell doesn't interact with Lowell much. Somehow, Brian H. doesn't seem like the type to take it, either, and would Sean really sucker-punch a special litigation counsel?

Still, the story has a ring of truth to it, just not with one of those three people as the recipient of the punch.

O'Donnell has roots in the Midwest, and I understand there's a tax firm in Wichita looking for sniveling wingnut has-been lawyers.

Well, I don't know if she cried at the office today, but she sure did look like she was having a hard time pretending to look happy in the pics from the Holiday Party. I guess that's why they got taken off network server so fast, LOL......

It can't be emphasized enough or repeated too often that Obama's use of cocaine is completely irrelevant to the campaign. Obama used coke, so what? He was young when he was putting the BMP up his nose. What's that got to do with now, when he hasn't tooted a line in years? Forget the Obama-cocaine thing. Obama . . . cocaine, it's trivial, silly. Cocaine . . . Obama, Obama . . . cocaine . . . Just stop it!

"It can't be emphasized enough or repeated too often that Obama's use of cocaine is completely irrelevant to the campaign. Obama used coke, so what? He was young when he was putting the BMP up his nose. What's that got to do with now, when he hasn't tooted a line in years? Forget the Obama-cocaine thing. Obama . . . cocaine, it's trivial, silly. Cocaine . . . Obama, Obama . . . cocaine . . . Just stop it!"

Yeah, I know, right?? Just like Bill Clinton experimenting with Ganja in college or Dubya being a reformed coke addict AND alcoholic. I mean, people just can't let go of the past, man. Just let it stay in the past. They're not in their teens, 20s, and 30s anymore for Pete's sake......Sheesh.

"Let he who is without sin, cast the first stone...."

*Throws stone high into the air vertically*

*Stone descends back to earth*

*PAP*

*Collapses and falls to the ground*

"voluntary" transfers don't strike like lightning from the sky. These kind of "voluntary" transfers are voluntary only to the extent you had THIS choice:

1. Take this job.
2. Be fired
3. Quit.

Yeah, its true, Tanner "made the decision to pursue this opportunity on his own accord."

The REAL question is what were his other choices. Yeah Yvette, it was "voluntary," in a way only a fool would define.

Yeah, right: a Tanner problem not a Bushco problem and all those good Republicans were troubled.

Since everybody was shouting out about what was going on why was it that Bushco sat on
their brains and did nothing?

How many attempted rehabilitations of the reThugs do we have to endure? If a Rethug wants my respect he or she will have to develop a moral backbone and leave that party.

As for Obama --indulging homophobes is still good politics while indulging racists is not. You have to remember that Obama campaigned for Lieberman in the primary.

No, my argument is that Obama did the expedient thing and should have done the right thing by dropping McGlurkin.

Obama is reasoning like a conservative: if it happened to me or my group I understand it but if it happens to a like group their complaints make no sense to me.

John says that you all are in trouble!

John says that we are not going to tolerate this any more.

John says you are to report all seditious thoughts to me1

John says you are to tell on your neighbors.

John says I must approve all leave and what time you go to lunch.

Where is my court jester Bob!? Bob, come here and entertain me. Report to me the results of your investigations!!

John says stop.

John says go.

John says I am his queen.

What? There is another!?!?! John said I was the one. John says everything will be fine. John says you cannot have leave. John says he will be here in the Section a very, very long time.

Obama is the real deal. Hillary is a poser. I can't believe this most recent bit from her.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/15/opinion/15sat3.html?ref=opinion&pagewanted=print

This is from the NYT. After all the Republican electoral chicanery, I can't believe Hillary is trying to muck around with the vote. And it's a double bonus. At the same time she is trying to suppress people who might vote against her, she's pandering to another portion of the electorate, like she's doing it for them.

This is just another disappointment in a long line of them from her. It's no coincidence that after she says it's time for the hard edge campaigning "fun" to start, she's been shamed into firing the co-head of her campaign in New Hampshire and two staffers in Iowa for smearing her opponent. And now this. Enough already. It's time for a change.

It's clear to me she doesn't learn from her mistakes. We'll see more of this if we elect her. Just like we saw her recent vote for Bush's warmongering proposition to declare part of the Iranian military enemy terrorists. You would think she would have learned from her mistake in voting to support Bush on the Iraq war. Nope.

Jane,

I don't think any of the Voting Section folks on this thread would argue that we agree with our Republican colleagues in the Section on matters ideological. What we are saying is that many of them have behaved in an extremely ethical manner in the past few months with regard to the Tanner situation.

We have many disagreements in terms of the emphasis different parts of the Section's mission should have (i.e., Voting Rights Act enforcement versus HAVA and National Voter Registration Act enforcement). But we have found common ground on a lot of things. The disagreements are not huge. Most of our Republican colleagues agree that minority voting rights enforcement is important. Most of the Democrats agree that dead people and illegal immigrants shouldn't vote.

As a bold, sweeping, somewhat stereotypical statement, the Democrats disagree with the Republicans as to where the balance should be struck. The Republicans think that voter ID laws are a good way to make sure illegal immigrants and dead people don't vote; the Democrats think that there's no proof that illegal/dead/double voting is a very big problem, certainly not a big enough problem to justify voter ID laws, which tend to disenfranchise minorities.

The Republicans, on the other hand, think that minority voting enforcement is a good idea but don't think that Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, which requires that states with the worst histories of discrimination clear even minor changes affecting voting with us, is a justifiable intrusion upon state sovereignty in 2007 (all I've spoken to agree it was justifiable in 1965).

The whole issue of election law enforcement can be thought of along a continuum. At one side of the continuum is election integrity; at the other side of the continuum is voting access. Both sides believe in both goals. All laws that affect voting qualifications shift the balance one way or the other. The Democrats in the Section tend to believe that the law should err on the side of access at the expense of integrity; the Republicans tend to believe that the law should err on the side of integrity at the expense of access. It is at the ends of the continuum that our Republicans and our Democrats disagree. There is a huge area in the middle, which encompasses the vast majority of our day-to-day business in voting law enforcement, where we do agree.

The business of our Section is too complex to be categorized in the way that leftish blogs, in many of which I am a proud participant under other pseudonyms, usually characterize them: Democrats good, Republicans bad. This is a characterization I am happy to endorse and even advance in the area of electoral *politics*. It doesn't work so well in the area of election *law enforcement*. Statutes are political compromises that are then interpreted by judges in the manner that they believe best comports with the intent of Congress, the Constitution, and the decisions of other judges. We are largely stuck with the interpretations that we are given.

What has happened in recent months -- recent week, even -- is that we have been able to put our political differences aside, see the common goals that we want to achieve, and reject the incompetent, corrupt leadership that was foisted upon us.

Now for the big surprise. John Tanner, Yvette Rivera, and Susana Lorenzo-Giguere are all registered *DEMOCRATS*. They are registered Democrats put in power by Republicans, at least to some extent to cover the tracks of those Republicans. Over the last year, Tanner and his crew have done things neither Democrats nor Republicans approve of. Just like Democrats and Republicans agree that dead people shouldn't be able to vote but black people should, Democrats and Republicans in the Section agree that our management shouldn't be charging stays at Cape Cod vacation homes or trips to Hawaii to the taxpayer. We agree that decisions on awards, bonuses, and promotions should be made on the basis of employee merit, not on the basis of employee skin color or employee sycophancy. We agree that litigation decisions should be based on the merits of cases, not on whether or not our Section Chief "likes" the lawyers on the other side. We believe that only meritorious claims should be brought.

We will continue to have vigorous debates with our Republican colleagues on issues such as voter ID and the continuing constitutionality of Section 5. Even here, we have areas of agreement: the Republicans think ID should be made widely available and should be free; the Democrats think that the Section 5 coverage formula doesn't make much sense these days. But we have learned to respect each other.

If there is a silver lining in the cloud that has been raining $#!t all over the Voting Section, this is it.

Bigger, I think you think Ice is someone who Ice isn't :)

Bigger,

I may be a good writer, but I don't have your guts to post personally identifying information here and let the world be damned. I assure you the respect is mutual!

Queen Yvette, you must then be referring to Bob P?

Scarlett O'Rivera: What are you doing?

Rhett Tanner: I'm leaving you, my dear. All you need now is a divorce and your dreams of Ashley can come true.

Scarlett O'Rivera: Oh, no! No, you're wrong, terribly wrong! I don't want a divorce. Oh Rhett, but I knew tonight, when I... when I knew I loved you, I ran home to tell you, oh darling, darling!

Rhett Tanner: Please don't go on with this, Leave us some dignity to remember out of our marriage. Spare us this last.

Scarlett O'Rivera: This last? Oh Rhett, do listen to me, I must have loved you for years, only I was such a stupid fool, I didn't know it. Please believe me, you must care! Melly said you did.

Rhett Tanner: I believe you. What about Ashley Wilkes?

Scarlett O'Rivera: I... I never really loved Ashley.

Rhett Tanner: You certainly gave a good imitation of it, up till this morning. No Scarlett, I tried everything. If you'd only met me half way, even when I came back from London.

Scarlett O'Rivera: I was so glad to see you. I was, Rhett, but you were so nasty.

Rhett Tanner: And then when you were sick, it was all my fault... I hoped against hope that you'd call for me, but you didn't.

Scarlett O'Rivera: I wanted you. I wanted you desperately but I didn't think you wanted me.

Rhett Tanner: It seems we've been at cross purposes, doesn't it? But it's no use now. As long as there was Bonnie, there was a chance that we might be happy. I liked to think that Bonnie was you, a little girl again, before the war, and poverty had done things to you. She was so like you, and I could pet her, and spoil her, as I wanted to spoil you. But when she went, she took everything.

Scarlett O'Rivera: Oh, Rhett, Rhett please don't say that. I'm so sorry, I'm so sorry for everything.

Rhett Tanner: My darling, you're such a child. You think that by saying, "I'm sorry," all the past can be corrected. Here, take my handkerchief. Never, at any crisis of your life, have I known you to have a handkerchief.

Scarlett O'Rivera: Rhett! Rhett, where are you going?

Rhett Tanner: I'm going back to Charleston, back where I belong.

Scarlett O'Rivera: Please, please take me with you!

Rhett Tanner: No, I'm through with everything here. I want peace. I want to see if somewhere there isn't something left in life of charm and grace. Do you know what I'm talking about?

Scarlett O'Rivera: No! I only know that I love you.

Rhett Tanner: That's your misfortune.
[Rhett turns to walk down the stairs]

Scarlett O'Rivera: Oh, Rhett!
[Scarlett watches Rhett walk to the door]
Scarlett O'Rivera: Rhett!
[runs down the stairs after Rhett]
Scarlett O'Rivera: Rhett, Rhett!
[catches him as he's walking out the front door]
Scarlett O'Rivera: Rhett... if you go, where shall I go, what shall I do?

Rhett Tanner: Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn.
[Rhett walks off into the fog]

Big Litigator Man aka Big Man Litigator: if only Tanner's problems were caused by a few disgruntled people in Section 5, foolish you. It wasn't until the ATTORNEYS in the Section, REPUBLICAN ATTORNEYS at that, started to see the light, that Tanner got into trouble. That, of course, in combination with his moronic, "clumsy" statements in public. Section 5 people have no power with the Front Office or anyone in power. It was when he made the Division and Dept look bad in public and when those attorneys had enough, that people in power wised up and made him leave. And I thought you would be smater than to believe all you read. If you think Tanner had a choice in this, you are more stupid than I hear you are. Oh, the Front Office was being warned by the House Judiciary Committee that the one hearing was just the beginning. They could move him, get him to resign, or start to prep him for another, more detailed hearing. If you thought Reps Ellis and Davis gave it to him in October, you have no clue what was in store. Make no mistake about it, this was NO CHOICE of Tanner's. Wake up, dust off your resume, and be gone.

Pork (Imaging Seamstress): Great Gee-hossefat!

Its my understanding that at least two OPR complaints were filed by two republican attorneys, and at least two/three other met with the Front Office. No Section 5ers went to OPR or the Front Office on Tanner, with the exception of the one analyst involved in the GA Team's complaint. No one cares about nonattorney concerns in DOJ, lets no kid ourselves. A serious pecking order exists. Section 5 basically had no dealing with Tanner, as Rivera was always in their way. And Section 5 knew Rivera had a free pass. Tanner let her do whatever she wanted. Nonetheless, my eternal respect and gratitude to the guy with the penchant for motorcycles. He is my personal hero.

It is too bad that John was forced to move on. He and Susana are hard-workers who made tremendous gains (recently cited by the Boston mayor, for example). I predict they will both be cleared by OPR. Susana worked twice as hard than all of you whiny ninnys (many of you I suspect left in the purge a few years ago). Tanner is soft-spoken and a true gentleman.

Is that Sean "Roscoe" O'Donnell, Yvette "Roscoe" Rivera, Joshua "Roscoe" Rogers, or Christian "Roscoe" Ortego above me? Could scarcely be anybody else.

> He and Susana are hard-workers who made tremendous gains (recently cited by the Boston mayor, for example).

Give me a break. Just click the "Civil Rights Division" tag under the main story above to find out about the "gains" John and Susana were responsible for. If you're talking about all the 203s, even Nina Perales over at MALDEF, whose constituency should be the most benefitted by all these 203 cases, said they weren't doing any good and that the Hispanic community would be better served by Section 2 suits getting majority-minority districts for Hispanics. I won't even go into the rest, as it's been so widely reported that anybody who could make such a statement has either been drinking Kool-Aid or has had his/her head in the sand for the last few years.

> I predict they will both be cleared by OPR.

Is that why half the folks on the Litigation side have been shuffling back and forth to OPR for interviews that have lasted in excess of two hours?

> Susana worked twice as hard than all of you whiny ninnys[.]

Ask the attorneys who have worked cases with her. When she *has* inserted herself into litigation, it's usually been to muck up the otherwise excellent work of Litigation attorneys.

> (many of you I suspect left in the purge a few years ago). Tanner is soft-spoken and a true gentleman.

Soft-spoken? Maybe. But do "true gentlemen" engage in purges? You contradict yourself. The problem is that while Tanner can be soft-spoken and a pat-you-on-the-back kind of guy, there's usually a dagger in his hand when he's "patting" you.

Cato:

Well-said. I'm sorting through my email to see if I have a personal email on the guy, because I want to send him my personal thanks. Only one thing I'd contest that you said:

> Outside of the extremely bright Republican attorney with a penchant for motorcycles, I'm not sure other Republican attorneys, if that term even makes sense, care to have the credit.

I know several who are extremely glad to see the last of John Tanner. I'm not sure "credit" is the applicable term here. The person who gets the credit for getting rid of John Tanner is John Tanner. None of us made him say that minorities die first. None of us went to Hawaii on the Government dime.

If there was an active effort to get rid of Tanner (and there was), it was only an active effort to make sure his egregious actions saw the light of day.

The post above purporting to be from Big Litigator Man isn't. He would never say "Don't you know I love to go to Texas ALMOST as much as Susana likes to go to Cape Cod." Besides, isn't he in Germany? 10:47 p.m. here is 4:47 a.m. in Germany. And, yes, TPM always puts the time in Eastern time, where its servers are located

Ice - your list of enablers is far too expanisve. Calling JR a defender of this crew is like saying Michael Vick loves dogs.

Broad,

Then I'd heard wrong. My apologies to JR if I incorrectly included him.

Roscoe: I suggest you read the Tale of Jememia Puddle-Duck by Beatrix Potter. It’s quick read and a pretty simple way to explore the literature of gentlemanly deception.

You all take yourselves a tad too seriously. Most likely, you are all jealous of the kudos John and Susana have received throughout their stellar Justice careers. While all of you hide behind your computer screens all day pretending the Section has the relevance it had back in the day, John and Susana are trailblazers who have gone out and made cases (i.e. foreign language cases) where few dared to tread before. The OPR attorney handling their cases is a true professional and will see you all as the whining pointy-headed fascists you all are. Perhaps you should all volunteer to go and work for Shanetta Cutler if you don't like the management.

Roscoe - I suspect OPR won't have the last say on this. Some of the allegations appear to be outright crimes as well as ethical violations of the rules of conduct. I count two more stops on the long ride before this story ends.

Obviously some folks on blogs get out of hand and over the top. Haterade is your term and can probably fit some of these posters. But you've got to be honest with yourself too. Calling these people trailblazers is pretty weak. And even if it were entirely true, which it isn't, being a trailblazer doesn't give you the right to violate standards of conduct and honesty. There were some good cases done early, no doubt. But if you were close to the matter then you would realize that quite a bit of extremely bad behavior has occured.

Whining - if you know who most of the posters on this thread are, beware, the Director of Intelligence may be looking for you.

If he's looking for intelligence, he's clearly come to the wrong place if he's poking around the Voting Section :P

If everyone who was entitled to vote and tried to do so had succeeded in voting for their choice in Florida, we would not have had Bush. Bushco has proceeded to imprison people without any kind of trial and to block any recourse, to kidnap individuals and send them to other countries to be tortured, to torture some in our own control and destroy the evidence, to conduct himself as an elected King who does
not return a bill with his objections but instead uses signing statements to rewrite it to his satisfaction. I could go on but it should be clear why I think it is a moral failure to voluntarily affix a R to one's name.

There is more evidence for the tooth fairy than for vote stealing of the type
that these weak-minded useful fools of Rove's have convinced themselves that they have a noble calling to pursue. The effect is to divert a substantial portion of the resources that should be devoted to voting access where the problems have been critical to our right to call ourselves a democracy.

Also, your logic is poor: the claim that under current conditions it is immoral to support the ReThugs by allowing the use of your name for that party is not the same as a claim that there are no immoral Democrats.

The Bigger Tigger noticed that some high falutin uppity old women ain't got an attitude for the Bigger Tigger anymore.

The Bigger Tigger was skipping along, singin his song, all the live long day today. Nothing like a dose of hot sauce on your cornflake to put you in your place. Keep that door locked! The Bigger Tigger's got a big smile so wide, you'd hardly stand it!!!

The Section 5 unit under her "leadership" has also lost quite a few submissions that got precleared by 60 days going by. Ho ho ho! Merry Christmas! Lets give her an award!!
HA HA HA HA!!!!

Yvette Rivera used to be a seamstress. She came from a long line of seamstresses in Puerto Rico. She then went to the Northeastern School of Law after ended its several year shut down for lack of a program. Then she became a member of the NY Bar after a couple of attempts at passing the bar. She worked in the voting section until her unfortunate failure on the bar became known in the 1980s. Then she bounced around one government job to another until finally got a job in OCC, which of course, nobody hardly has heard of. It is the comptroller of the currency and has one of the most narrow legal function in all of law. Then Tanner dragged her back to the voting section becuase he knew she was qualified, because they used to go to church together. Her background, in a word, is undistinguished.