Replies

There is nothing here that was not known in 2007.

(I.)
Barry submitted what was in essence a fraudulent Bar App.
(1)Not disclosing aliases
(2)Not reporting traffic violations
(3)Not reporting drug use.

Michelle, probably through negligence, was complicit in an insurance fraud. Both were spectacularly incompetent attorneys with very little actual experience.
Nothing really unusual here, though. By this point in our legal history, every large law firm in the country and their clients have been burned/disappointed by Affirmative Action Ani. However, Bar Associations will always seek any reason to offer their members the opportunity to "Surrender," rather than face Disciplinary Hearings. Nothing unusual here, either. As GBS said, "Every profession is a conspiracy against the laity."

(II.)
Barry was NOT THE EDITOR of the Harvard Law Review. He was the President. IOW, he managed the office, which was already managed by paid staff. His was largely a ceremonial post, although in addition to hanging around cocktail parties as a certified Harvard "exotic," he did attend meetings. He apparently neither wrote, nor edited anything for the review.

(III.)
Barry was NOT A CONSTITUTIONAL LAW PROFESSOR. He received a political appointment as an Adjunct Instructor ... again a post which required very little actual work. What minimal work he actually did was reported by the students to be quite substandard.

What is quite amazing about the more or less accurate ... but rather dated .... information posted by so many of us in this thread is that most of the voting public have no idea WTF we are talking about or why it even matters. The Infotainment Industry has done its job very well indeed.

BTW, BJ Clinton was "Suspended" from the Arkansas Bar, not disbarred, which punishment many Bar Members sought.