Former Antitrust Official: Corrupt Lobbying Holds Sizable Sway at DOJ
A former top DOJ antitrust official on Monday lambasted other Justice leaders for creating what he said was a "pay-for-play" environment at the agency that allows companies with MAGA connections to get approvals. Speaking Monday at the Technology Policy Institute's Aspen Forum (see [Re:2508180023]), Roger Alford, former principal deputy assistant in DOJ's antitrust division, said there's a battle "between genuine MAGA reformers and MAGA in name only lobbyists."
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Communications Daily is required reading for senior executives at top telecom corporations, law firms, lobbying organizations, associations and government agencies (including the FCC). Join them today!
Alford's comments focused on DOJ's handling of Hewlett-Packard's purchase of Juniper Networks, but he said the same lobbying concerns apply to a number of cases. Alford said Chad Mizelle, chief of staff to Attorney General Pam Bondi, and associate attorney general nominee Stanley Woodward "perverted justice" by giving special favors to MAGA-affiliated friends. Companies are aggressively hiring MAGA-affiliated lobbyists to take advantage of that, he added.
Alford, now a law professor at the University of Notre Dame, described himself as "a friend of the administration" and said DOJ's problems were personnel, not systemic. He said DOJ's antitrust chief, Gail Slater, is "working hard to remain true to President Trump’s core message." While he was ostensibly fired in July for insubordination, Alford's dismissal actually came from lobbyists exerting influence on his bosses in retaliation "for protecting the rule of law against the rule of lobbyists."
A DOJ spokesperson emailed that Alford "is the James Comey of antitrust -- pursuing blind self-promotion and ego, while ignoring reality." Comey was fired as FBI director during President Donald Trump's first administration.
The spokesperson added that people "should treat [Alford's] comments for what they are -- the delusional musings of a disgruntled ex. As the Department has reiterated, resolution of the merger was based on the merits of the transaction, including national security concerns raised directly to Department leadership by the intelligence community.”