« “NONPARTISAN” SECRETARY OF STATE RITCHIE HAS PARTISAN SWEARING-IN EVENT | Home | KELLIHER PROMISES CIVILITY »
HATCH TO WORK IN SWANSON’S OFFICE FOR “INDEFINITE PERIOD”
By Michael B. Brodkorb | January 2, 2007
"Initially, Hatch had indicated that if he stayed, it would be for only a short time. But a Swanson spokesperson said Tuesday that Hatch will stay for an indefinite period, working on complex litigation issues.
'It does make you wonder who's really in charge,' said House Minority Leader Marty Seifert, R-Marshall. 'It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out how he gave her a lot of assistance getting elected and that she owes him a lot.'" Source: Star Tribune, January 2, 2006
###
This story keeps getting better.
Topics: Uncategorized | 12 Comments »
12 Responses to “HATCH TO WORK IN SWANSON’S OFFICE FOR “INDEFINITE PERIOD””
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
January 2nd, 2007 at 10:06 pm
The really bizarre thing is they don’t have a clue what Hatch will be doing
“She says many of the details of Hatch’s duties have yet to be worked out, including the types of cases the new unit will focus on.
“It could be consumer, it could be other types of financial issues, it could be other issues as well,” said Swanson. “The state of Minnesota gets involved in a lot of very, very complex, sophisticated litigation, so it will be that type of litigation.”
http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2007/01/02/hatchstayson/
January 2nd, 2007 at 10:07 pm
So Hatch will be doing the “very, very complex, sophisticated litigation”, while Swanson will stick to the really easy shit.
January 2nd, 2007 at 11:56 pm
Or maybe there will be the bigger cases that will require Hatch’s expertise on? To still be considered useful to the people of Minnesota in whatever capacity is a good thing.
January 3rd, 2007 at 1:55 am
Who is the “Swanson spokesperson” and why wasn’t she named by name in this article?
Perhaps because it raises more red flags about who our Attorney General really is?
January 3rd, 2007 at 6:37 am
I get it – Swanson is Hatch’s bitch and he’ll continue being the pint-sized tyrant he always was. Can anyone guess what’s going to happen the first time Swanson directs Hatch to do something he doesn’t want to do?
Ah hahahahahhah….
January 3rd, 2007 at 7:39 am
[...] It seems Mike Hatch is in fact that lingering pressence in Minnesota’s Attorney General office. “Initially, Hatch had indicated that if he stayed, it would be for only a short time. But a Swanson spokesperson said Tuesday that Hatch will stay for an indefinite period, working on complex litigation issues. [...]
January 3rd, 2007 at 9:34 am
Mike Hatch is upset about losing a close election. He also is a very poor loser. He is digging himself a hole. How deep? who knows? The man is just trying to stay in the media eye. If he continues his antics much longer he will be in the media’s eye of the storm.
January 3rd, 2007 at 9:38 am
I have to say this is troubling, and not because Hatch is a DFLer. Nor because Hatch is an arrogant slimeball, jerk.
It is troubling because the voters elected Lori Swanson. I admit I am a partisan Republican, but I am certainly willing to give Swanson the benefit of the doubt until the next election. However, with keeping Hatch on, it raises red flags about her managment ability (which is a very large part of the job).
Hatch should have left quietly. If he wanted to remain in the AG’s office, he should not have run for governor. Mondale left, Spannus left, Humphrey left. When Skip left he did not return after he lost a bid for governor. This is just weird, plain and simple.
Hatch seems to me like a guy who is just hanging around high school after graduation. Not moving on with his life.
I also question where the funding for this is coming from and why we need another lawyer in an already overstaffed AG office.
If I were a DFLer I would feel the same way. It is time to move on Mr. Hatch. Would we all not be scratching our heads if Mark Ritchie kept Mary Kiffmeyer around in this capacity? Yes. How about if Otto kept Pat Anderson around? yes, again, and rightfully so. The fact that Hatch and Swanson are from the same partty does not make it right, it is still plain weird.
Get a life Mike Hatch, move one.
One last thing, I am not hooked into the Twin Cities legal scene, but I am a little suprised that he has no other offers. He must really be despised even more than I thought in DFL circles since 80% of the lawyers out there are Dems. This all just bizarre.
January 3rd, 2007 at 10:32 am
Hatch – a salaried staff attorney for the state? He must be the first AG to go backwards in his career after “leaving office.”
January 3rd, 2007 at 10:55 am
Hatch has no class whatsoever and Swanson is making a huge mistake allowing him to stay around and second guess her. On the other side of the coin, maybe she has no clue as to her responsibilities and needs this guy to hold her up.
January 3rd, 2007 at 3:37 pm
If I were Swanson, the only condition under which I would have retained Hatch was under a media gag order.
She will lose all credibility if he is allowed to continue talking to the media whilst under her employ.
Bad move.
January 3rd, 2007 at 4:27 pm
The most importanat detail here is that it was Democrats who made certain Hatch would be fired. While Swanson was strongly connected to Hatch I’d be willing to bet if Democrats had to do it all over again Steve Kelley would be AG. If she doesn’t rid herself of Hatch before he starts his next campaign I don’t think the voters will be willing to give her a pass come 2010 and the DFL may very well lose the AG office.