Cook on Concord: Thanksgiving reflections on 2025

Looking back on the shutdown, statesmanship and other meaty matters

Thanksgiving is a time for reflecting back on the year almost complete, and to take stock of the good, the bad and the curious.

For me, watching three little grandchildren grow up and become people with their own personalities has been a joy. Losing a longtime family dog was as painful for us as for everyone who has that experience.

Renewing friendships while helping to plan a 60th (!) high school reunion has been a surprising delight. Being able to continue a career that is enjoyable is rewarding, and recovering from a second shoulder replacement a relief.

Reflecting on events in public life, both in New Hampshire and nationally, brings similarly differing reactions.

Observing those serving in public office has long reminded me of the difference between office “holders” and “statesmen.” Every elected and appointed official is the former; few are the latter. The recent “government shutdown” provides examples.

The first thing to remember about these disruptions is that they have only happened since the GOP imposed one on President Jimmy Carter. The second thing is that virtually never has the party holding out achieved anything real in doing so.

In this case, it seems to me that the “statesmanship” involved was that of the handful of senators, led by New Hampshire’s Jeanne Shaheen, who broke with their party to end the shutdown.

Shaheen has a record of responsible leadership, whether in the New Hampshire Senate, as governor, or as U.S. senator.

More cynical observers might question whether her actions this time were the result of her announced retirement from the Senate next year, but this action was consistent with her history.

Recent reactions to the taped message from U.S. Rep Maggie Goodlander, Arizona Sen. Mark Kelly and other former military officers now members of Congress, including accusations from President Trump that their recitation of that part of the Uniform Code of Military Justice requires members of the military to refuse to comply with illegal orders was “seditious,” were misplaced.

Accurate reminders of the law cannot be themselves illegal, and any weaponizing of law enforcement as a result may itself be illegal. Complying with the section of the military code quoted is not a simple matter, but the reminder clearly was a call for all of us to consider the legality of executive orders.

The dismissal of charges against James Comey and Liticia James, due to the defective appointment of the U.S. attorney who brought the charges, was one of the results of an executive command for action, which should be reviewed by all Americans, not just the courts.

The affair pointss out the importance of an independent judiciary, but also of an independent Department of Justice, able to neutrally evaluate the strength of cases before bringing charges or seeking to sway grand jurors. Often, the most powerful person in the criminal justice system is the prosecutor, with the discretion whether to bring charges. Criminal charges involve huge amounts of money, sleepless nights and sullied public reputations of those charged, no matter what the outcome.

All of which also brings to mind the strange, year-long saga of Rye Harbor development, the Pease Development Authority (PDA), Ports Director Gino Marconi, his wife, Supreme Court Justice Barbara Hantz-Marconi and criminal charges brought against the last two by the New Hampshire attorney general.

In the interest of full disclosure, Justice Hantz-Marconi and I worked for the same law firm before her appointment to the Supreme Court, and we are friends. Notwithstanding that, my observations are based only on the published reports. From appearances, there was a dispute about the development of Rye Harbor where a number of commercial fishermen have their boats and businesses.

The port director, Gino Marconi, and certain PDA board members disagreed about how the facility should be developed. It became heated, Marconi was put on leave and then the Attorney General’s Office brought criminal charges against him after a long period of investigation.

Justice Hantz-Marconi, disqualified from hearing the many cases involving the Attorney General’s Office, had a meeting with the governor suggesting that she could not do her job as long as the investigation of her husband was going on. After learning of this, charges were brought against Justice Hantz-Marconi, as well.

After months of motions and court procedural decisions, all of the original charges against both Justice Hantz-Marconi and Gino Marconi were dropped, and far lesser charges resulted in pleas and relatively small fines, all arranged to end this mess.

At least to this observer, it seems the Attorney General’s Office was a bit overzealous in turning a policy dispute into alleged crimes for which charges were then dropped.

Brad Cook is a Manchester attorney. The views expressed in this column are his own. He can be reached at bradfordcook01@gmail.com.