We all know how powerful the web can be for raising political money. Well if you're game the Duke Cunningham Legal Defense Fund is apparently ready to accept your donation.

Crime and legal stories broadly speaking are just where my interest happens to lie.

And books that were published in much larger numbers than Selfish Little are hard to find. And publishers who wanted to publish my last few works have them stuck in limbo while new distribution ideas and legal issues and fears are blown away.

Imam Rauf and his backers have every legal right to build their extravagant Islamic center within the lethal radius of Ground Zero. But the rest of us have the right to question why they insist on doing so.

Each day each one of us chooses not to do many things that would be legal but offensive to those around us.

We need to be discussing issues specifically to help the American people. And that would not include illegal aliens. These are people - I'm for immigration - legal immigration. I've been an immigration attorney. But people who have come to our country and violated laws we should not be providing full health care services.

The right to a trial is a core principle of the American legal system. Depriving Americans of these essential liberties undermines the Constitution while doing nothing to strengthen our national security.

Unless you have a perception of who you are as a lawyer you will never be at ease in dealing with legal matters clients or courts. But if you know who you are and why you're there all you need is the expertise and the information.

So I'm getting less chips paying the same amount of money. Is that legal for them to do this?

It is curious that with my somewhat antinomian tendencies I should have gone to Trinity Hall - which was and is before all a Law College - and should thus have been thrown into close touch with the legal element in life.

While there continues to be differences the important point is that all citizens and elected officials use democratic and legal avenues for solving those differences.

There are obviously legal restrictions on what you can do on TV in the States as there are everywhere.

For centuries we have been living in the society where not laws but people ruled where there was no legal state.

I have a book coming out in September for example where the plot concerns counterfeiting and I had to do a lot of research on that. Or on any legal matters for example I have to do a lot of research online.

I'm not a lawyer and maybe I should have used more specific legal language.

I object to a legal approach when settling questions of science or scientific behavior.

Companies shouldn't use the law to prevent consumers from doing something legal.

I hope gay marriage will be legal in every state.

People talk of me as being the inventor of the legal thriller.

Drones can be a highly effective way of dealing with high-priority targets but they should not become the drug of choice for an administration that is afraid to use successful legal and safe tactics of the past.

We knew that if the photos of CIA officers conducting authorized EIT (enhanced interrogation techniques) ever got out the difference between a legal authorized necessary and safe program and the mindless actions of some MPs (military police) would be buried by the impact of the images.

In my book I detail the critical information we obtained from al Qaeda terrorists after they became compliant following a short period of enhanced interrogation. I have no doubt that that interrogation was legal necessary and saved lives.

I believe that President Clinton considered the legal merits of the arguments for the pardon as he understood them and he rendered his judgment wise or unwise on the merits.

We're involved right now in some very significant legal battles and it would be the wrong thing for me to do to step out in the middle of those battles.