As the Senator from Michigan has already explained, the provision allowing the court to appoint Mr. Fiske as an independent counsel under the statute would have no effect on anyone's eligibility to obtain attorney fees. Whom the court appoints as independent counsel is totally irrelevant to whether or not a subject of the independent counsel investigation is eligible under the law for attorney fees. Mr. Fiske, as a regulatory independent counsel who was appointed by the Attorney General and who operates under her authority, is an arm of the Justice Department. Whether the Madison Guaranty case is being investigated by a regulatory independent counsel or by career Justice Department employees is of no import with respect to an individual's eligibility for attorney fees under the independent counsel statute. In other words, a regulatory independent counsel and the Justice Department are one and the same for purposes of the statute's 'but for' standard for the award of attorney fees. I also note that, in my judgment, the legal fees that have been or will be incurred by President Clinton or others as a result of Mr. Fiske's current investigation would not be reimbursable under the independent counsel statute.
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the implications of appointing an independent counsel and attorney fee eligibility.
Share
More from William Cohen
I think we have a lot to fear with a possible re-election or election of Donald Trump. Donald Trump is the founding father's worst nightmare. A man who has no moral character, has no general understanding of the rule of law or respect for…
Senator Tester is absolutely correct. He is approaching it the right way. Let's get some real answers here.
We're watching the possibility of real time viewing of mass slaughter. What Putin is able to do, he has choices as all of your contributors have pointed out, he can do it swiftly, moving into one city, perhaps trying to decapitate the…
It's clear that he can't conquer the hearts and minds, of the Ukrainian people.





