"Justice must not only be done, but it must also be seen to be done." Lord Hewart, Lord Chief Justice of England said that almost 100 years ago. The people of the United States need to see that justice is being pursued, in a legal, serious, timely way.
Will soon know whether Justices Aliso, Thomas, Gorsuch, Kavanagh and Barrett support the Seditionists. Whereas they can make an overnight decision not to enjoin a law preventing the constitutional right to abortion, it will be telling if the Court refuses to act in an equally expeditious manner when it comes to Congress’ right to investigate sedition by their sponsors.
I agree completely! They can act immediately to protect the Texas abortion ban. If they can't act immediately to allow Congress to investigate an insurrection, they are accomplices.
In the 2016 Presidential campaign, a theme of the Hillary Clinton campaign was that much of Donald Trump’s media support came from “Fake News” - Breitbart et al., outlets outside mainstream media. This was a moderately effective theme for the Clinton campaign although, of course, insufficient in the end.
Donald Trump knew an effective meme when he saw one. As soon as he was inaugurated, he rebranded “Fake News” to refer to the mainstream media and made it his own, pushing it relentlessly, to the point where few even remember the slogan was introduced as an anti-Trump meme.
In 2021 the GOP messaging gurus have had a fair bit of success decrying “cancel culture” by “the woke”, Dr. Seuss’ heirs and others on the left.
Now we have this story about banning and even burning books. We have attempted firings of teachers for teaching civil war history at odds with “Lost Cause” mythology.
My question to you and the rest of Democratic-leaning media is this:
Why does it NEVER occur to us to brand this type of activity as “Republican Cancel Culture”??? And keep repeating it until it sticks?
There is nothing more effective in politics than ripping an effective slogan out of your opponent’s hands and making it your own.
Hi, Steve. As many readers have asked me, "why can't we hire the people at The Lincoln Project" to do messaging for the Democratic Party. The failure to effectively message is one of the most common complaints I hear from readers.
Robert - I am among those who wondered about Dem’s need to outsource negative campaigning to Republicans like the Lincoln Project. I wondered about it last year.
It’s time to ask ourselves why this is. I believe Dems are too nice. We believe we speak truth and they speak lies, which may be true, but we spend an inordinate amount of energy policing ourselves to make double sure we speak truth, checking and double checking ourselves. The other side just lets fly with accusations and it’s killing us. While we have a hard time speaking obvious truths. We’d rather lose than take a chance of being wrong.
The idea of a jiujitsu move of grabbing their slogan out of their hands and beating them with it doesn’t fly because we’re afraid it makes us just like them. It doesn’t. And actually, how many care? And how much of the drop off in Democratic base enthusiasm is due to perceptions of weakness?
We really need to let ‘et rip and see where that gets us.
And while I get James Carville’s point about grad-school language, his larger point about purging “wokeness” will only lead to unproductive internecine warfare. We don’t need internecine warfare, we need to direct our fire at the other side.
We have reached the point of school boards burning books. I feel like we're inside the movie Cabaret.
Our esteemed writer asks "What is it about the legal system that allows somebody to keep appealing repeatedly to avoid ever being accountable?" The answer is this: The greed and power of those who control the legal profession have led to this. The Federalist Society has done its job through the power and strategies acquired by the forces inside our biggest law firms, which control the judiciary and the lawyers who run those firms. Even decent men and women toe the line, unaware they are pawns of those within the legal profession who run our government. Just try getting an audience on a matter of public good that requires even a tiny bit of magnanimity on the part of a big, wealthy law firm. Even small efforts are overpowered by indifference. They behave as though common courtesy belongs to others, so they become immune to the bigger picture of what is created by their power. Book burning! As I watched that local board talking about burning books, chills ran down my spine.
I have been called upon to need just simple help from those powerful firms, and they are untouchable. Unreachable. Unaccountable. It is those traits that led to the control of our judiciary, our legislators - and now our school boards.
Even good people follow suit and don't see ther complicity in furthering the control that has made its way from the top down.
"What is it about the legal system that allows somebody to keep appealing repeatedly to avoid ever being accountable?" The answer to that important question is more than you think.
The failure of the justice system to respond to the attempted coup and insurrection is one of the most disappointing aspects of the Biden presidency. An insurrectionist was just sentenced to 41 months (with ten months credit for time served) for attacking a police officer in the Capitol. Really? If you attack a federal law enforcement officer during an insurrection, you are sentenced to less than 4 years in prison?
I must disagree, at least in part. Repeated appeals are what give the wrongly convicted hope that error may be redressed. And while I fight large law firms every day, they also write amicus briefs to the Supreme Court, lending the weight of their prestige to good causes. When the Bush administration jailed people at Guantánamo, the leader of the lawyers here in Boston who resisted that wrong was a partner in one of the largest and most respected law firms. He was particularly active in representing Uighurs who were imprisoned there, people who truly had no country.
Many of the AmLaw 100 law firms devote 5% of their billable time to pro bono matters. On an order of magnitude, my guess is that is $1 billion in free legal representation every year to people who cannot afford lawyers or who are the subject of dissemination. I doubt that any other profession makes such a big commitment. But at the same time, some of those firms have been Trump's lawyers in trying to conceal his misdeeds and/or the source of several of the coup plotters.
Notwithstanding that "many" of this country's largest law firms devote 5% of their billable time to pro bono matters, including probably the "good causes" JJMargolis referred to, the partners at those big firms still EACH make more than $4 million on average. I didn't say that those firms have no good works to their credit. But the question that Robert put to us in last night's piece was "What is it about the legal system that allows somebody to keep appealing repeatedly to avoid ever being accountable?" The answer to that is complicated, and is not mitigated by the partners of those firms being satisfied by sharing some of their millions with a little to support pro bono. The firms get a lot from that pro bono: public recognition, interesting work to keep their associates happy, a way to deter criticism that they are greedy and power-hungry. Just look to see the power exerted by the Federalist Society and the SCOTUS that now controls an agenda that scares the heck out of most Americans. Don't fool yourselves into thinking that the big law firms weren't behind that power. As the Watergate voice said in the darkness: "Follow the money."
The truth is that the huge salaries reaped by the partners of those large firms comes at someone's expense. and who do you think those someone's are? They are the associates who suffer emotional distress in trying to serve those partners. Those law firms are not accountable for the hardship on the lawyers who bill the rest of the hours. Sure, some of it is pro bono, but what of the work that isn't? Those law firms know they are making their big bucks because someone is working night and day to earn them those 7-figure salaries. And when it comes to that hardship, who is accountable? When a lawyer takes their own life, the law firm is pretty much back to normal after the funeral. Lawyers in the field may see an Amicus Brief that seems altruistic, but no one is talking about the nervous breakdowns or alcohol or drug addictions that destroy careers and lives. It's not easy finding even one partner or former partner willing to be bothered to help save those lawyers who are on the edge. Maybe it's just easier to joke about lawyers, forgetting they have spouses and children and clients that become injured along with them. The statistics prove that close to half of all lawyers would choose another profession if they could do it over again. That level of unhappiness is not overcome by having pro bono engagements that don't detract from 7-figure salaries.
That's a good story. Too bad it isn't the large part. I can point to many examples of the disregard the biggest law firms have towards the problems in our legal system. I wish it weren't so. I wish your story was the prevalent one. Let me know when you are willing to debate the point.
It’s a time to keep on keepin’ on. To move ahead, stubbornly. Even if we may have only a dim view of our objective, keep telling ourselves that right (but not the Right) will prevail.
As for more mundane matters, I still harbor some hope that the Supreme Court will give Trump the short shrift he deserves. The right-wing of the court may be political hacks, but i hope not just hacks.
Thank you for hope, Robert, even amidst calls to (OMG) burn books, an outdated trope in a digital age. My Far Right next door neighbor asked me yesterday to explain what ‘the Jews’ believe, so I guess Fox News has had something to say about that this week. “She means well,” the ultimate southern put-down, could apply, except this 85 year old from the country, has apparently never known a single Jewish person. Cabaret, indeed!
You might point out to your neighbor that it’s very hard to say what Jews believe, because if you ask ten of us a question, you’ll get eleven opinions. Or maybe twelve.
Do ask. It's a good thing to push back taking offense and teach something to decrease the potential for future offense to others less able to respond appropriately. Spread illumination through thoughtfulness.
Robert: I thought of you when I saw today's cartoon by Mike Luckovich in the Atlanta Journal Constitution. Since this is the only way I know how to contact you, here's a link to Mike's blog:
"Justice must not only be done, but it must also be seen to be done." Lord Hewart, Lord Chief Justice of England said that almost 100 years ago. The people of the United States need to see that justice is being pursued, in a legal, serious, timely way.
I am putting that quote in my pocket for future use. Thanks!
Will soon know whether Justices Aliso, Thomas, Gorsuch, Kavanagh and Barrett support the Seditionists. Whereas they can make an overnight decision not to enjoin a law preventing the constitutional right to abortion, it will be telling if the Court refuses to act in an equally expeditious manner when it comes to Congress’ right to investigate sedition by their sponsors.
I agree completely! They can act immediately to protect the Texas abortion ban. If they can't act immediately to allow Congress to investigate an insurrection, they are accomplices.
Re: book burning:
In the 2016 Presidential campaign, a theme of the Hillary Clinton campaign was that much of Donald Trump’s media support came from “Fake News” - Breitbart et al., outlets outside mainstream media. This was a moderately effective theme for the Clinton campaign although, of course, insufficient in the end.
Donald Trump knew an effective meme when he saw one. As soon as he was inaugurated, he rebranded “Fake News” to refer to the mainstream media and made it his own, pushing it relentlessly, to the point where few even remember the slogan was introduced as an anti-Trump meme.
In 2021 the GOP messaging gurus have had a fair bit of success decrying “cancel culture” by “the woke”, Dr. Seuss’ heirs and others on the left.
Now we have this story about banning and even burning books. We have attempted firings of teachers for teaching civil war history at odds with “Lost Cause” mythology.
My question to you and the rest of Democratic-leaning media is this:
Why does it NEVER occur to us to brand this type of activity as “Republican Cancel Culture”??? And keep repeating it until it sticks?
There is nothing more effective in politics than ripping an effective slogan out of your opponent’s hands and making it your own.
Hi, Steve. As many readers have asked me, "why can't we hire the people at The Lincoln Project" to do messaging for the Democratic Party. The failure to effectively message is one of the most common complaints I hear from readers.
Robert - I am among those who wondered about Dem’s need to outsource negative campaigning to Republicans like the Lincoln Project. I wondered about it last year.
It’s time to ask ourselves why this is. I believe Dems are too nice. We believe we speak truth and they speak lies, which may be true, but we spend an inordinate amount of energy policing ourselves to make double sure we speak truth, checking and double checking ourselves. The other side just lets fly with accusations and it’s killing us. While we have a hard time speaking obvious truths. We’d rather lose than take a chance of being wrong.
The idea of a jiujitsu move of grabbing their slogan out of their hands and beating them with it doesn’t fly because we’re afraid it makes us just like them. It doesn’t. And actually, how many care? And how much of the drop off in Democratic base enthusiasm is due to perceptions of weakness?
We really need to let ‘et rip and see where that gets us.
And while I get James Carville’s point about grad-school language, his larger point about purging “wokeness” will only lead to unproductive internecine warfare. We don’t need internecine warfare, we need to direct our fire at the other side.
Imagine this ad: Republicans are always whining about “cancel culture”. But they’re pretty amazing cancellers themselves, aren’t they?
Cut to library bookshelves wrapped in police tape. Cut to a book burning.
Protect Freedom! Vote Democrat!
We have reached the point of school boards burning books. I feel like we're inside the movie Cabaret.
Our esteemed writer asks "What is it about the legal system that allows somebody to keep appealing repeatedly to avoid ever being accountable?" The answer is this: The greed and power of those who control the legal profession have led to this. The Federalist Society has done its job through the power and strategies acquired by the forces inside our biggest law firms, which control the judiciary and the lawyers who run those firms. Even decent men and women toe the line, unaware they are pawns of those within the legal profession who run our government. Just try getting an audience on a matter of public good that requires even a tiny bit of magnanimity on the part of a big, wealthy law firm. Even small efforts are overpowered by indifference. They behave as though common courtesy belongs to others, so they become immune to the bigger picture of what is created by their power. Book burning! As I watched that local board talking about burning books, chills ran down my spine.
I have been called upon to need just simple help from those powerful firms, and they are untouchable. Unreachable. Unaccountable. It is those traits that led to the control of our judiciary, our legislators - and now our school boards.
Even good people follow suit and don't see ther complicity in furthering the control that has made its way from the top down.
"What is it about the legal system that allows somebody to keep appealing repeatedly to avoid ever being accountable?" The answer to that important question is more than you think.
The failure of the justice system to respond to the attempted coup and insurrection is one of the most disappointing aspects of the Biden presidency. An insurrectionist was just sentenced to 41 months (with ten months credit for time served) for attacking a police officer in the Capitol. Really? If you attack a federal law enforcement officer during an insurrection, you are sentenced to less than 4 years in prison?
I must disagree, at least in part. Repeated appeals are what give the wrongly convicted hope that error may be redressed. And while I fight large law firms every day, they also write amicus briefs to the Supreme Court, lending the weight of their prestige to good causes. When the Bush administration jailed people at Guantánamo, the leader of the lawyers here in Boston who resisted that wrong was a partner in one of the largest and most respected law firms. He was particularly active in representing Uighurs who were imprisoned there, people who truly had no country.
Many of the AmLaw 100 law firms devote 5% of their billable time to pro bono matters. On an order of magnitude, my guess is that is $1 billion in free legal representation every year to people who cannot afford lawyers or who are the subject of dissemination. I doubt that any other profession makes such a big commitment. But at the same time, some of those firms have been Trump's lawyers in trying to conceal his misdeeds and/or the source of several of the coup plotters.
Notwithstanding that "many" of this country's largest law firms devote 5% of their billable time to pro bono matters, including probably the "good causes" JJMargolis referred to, the partners at those big firms still EACH make more than $4 million on average. I didn't say that those firms have no good works to their credit. But the question that Robert put to us in last night's piece was "What is it about the legal system that allows somebody to keep appealing repeatedly to avoid ever being accountable?" The answer to that is complicated, and is not mitigated by the partners of those firms being satisfied by sharing some of their millions with a little to support pro bono. The firms get a lot from that pro bono: public recognition, interesting work to keep their associates happy, a way to deter criticism that they are greedy and power-hungry. Just look to see the power exerted by the Federalist Society and the SCOTUS that now controls an agenda that scares the heck out of most Americans. Don't fool yourselves into thinking that the big law firms weren't behind that power. As the Watergate voice said in the darkness: "Follow the money."
The truth is that the huge salaries reaped by the partners of those large firms comes at someone's expense. and who do you think those someone's are? They are the associates who suffer emotional distress in trying to serve those partners. Those law firms are not accountable for the hardship on the lawyers who bill the rest of the hours. Sure, some of it is pro bono, but what of the work that isn't? Those law firms know they are making their big bucks because someone is working night and day to earn them those 7-figure salaries. And when it comes to that hardship, who is accountable? When a lawyer takes their own life, the law firm is pretty much back to normal after the funeral. Lawyers in the field may see an Amicus Brief that seems altruistic, but no one is talking about the nervous breakdowns or alcohol or drug addictions that destroy careers and lives. It's not easy finding even one partner or former partner willing to be bothered to help save those lawyers who are on the edge. Maybe it's just easier to joke about lawyers, forgetting they have spouses and children and clients that become injured along with them. The statistics prove that close to half of all lawyers would choose another profession if they could do it over again. That level of unhappiness is not overcome by having pro bono engagements that don't detract from 7-figure salaries.
That's a good story. Too bad it isn't the large part. I can point to many examples of the disregard the biggest law firms have towards the problems in our legal system. I wish it weren't so. I wish your story was the prevalent one. Let me know when you are willing to debate the point.
Merrick Garland needs to grow some cajones
That is unlikely to happen. The decent thing for him to do is to resign.
WORD!
"Justice is what love looks like in public." Cornel West
It’s a time to keep on keepin’ on. To move ahead, stubbornly. Even if we may have only a dim view of our objective, keep telling ourselves that right (but not the Right) will prevail.
As for more mundane matters, I still harbor some hope that the Supreme Court will give Trump the short shrift he deserves. The right-wing of the court may be political hacks, but i hope not just hacks.
Thank you for hope, Robert, even amidst calls to (OMG) burn books, an outdated trope in a digital age. My Far Right next door neighbor asked me yesterday to explain what ‘the Jews’ believe, so I guess Fox News has had something to say about that this week. “She means well,” the ultimate southern put-down, could apply, except this 85 year old from the country, has apparently never known a single Jewish person. Cabaret, indeed!
Ugh.
You might point out to your neighbor that it’s very hard to say what Jews believe, because if you ask ten of us a question, you’ll get eleven opinions. Or maybe twelve.
I hear that! I kept thinking that she could not tell me what Baptists believe if I asked her—or anyone else., for that matter.
Do ask. It's a good thing to push back taking offense and teach something to decrease the potential for future offense to others less able to respond appropriately. Spread illumination through thoughtfulness.
Oh! Someone must’ve thought Texas didn’t have our own Pythonesc clowns: 'Vax the Jews' banner hung over bridge near Austin JCC
Robert: I thought of you when I saw today's cartoon by Mike Luckovich in the Atlanta Journal Constitution. Since this is the only way I know how to contact you, here's a link to Mike's blog:
https://www.ajc.com/opinion/mike-luckovich-blog/