General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsMerrick Garland
I love this mans heart and intellect, but when it comes to taking the fight to Trump and his thugs, he needs to grow a set. By zeroing in on them and punishing them, he needs to realize he is preserving Democracy.
tulipsandroses
(5,124 posts)That he thinks giving insurrectionists harsh sentences would further radicalize them. Very disappointed. I hope that report was wrong or he changes course. Does he really think a slap on the hand will make them less radical?
malaise
(269,013 posts)Celerity
(43,389 posts)malaise
(269,013 posts)Divide and rule!
Celerity
(43,389 posts)https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/10/business/media/wall-street-journal-murdoch.html
The Wall Street Journal is a rarity in 21st-century media: a newspaper that makes money. A lot of money. But at a time when the U.S. population is growing more racially diverse, older white men still make up the largest chunk of its readership, with retirees a close second. The No. 1 reason we lose subscribers is they die, goes a joke shared by some Journal editors. Now a special innovation team and a group of nearly 300 newsroom employees are pushing for drastic changes at the paper, which has been part of Rupert Murdochs media empire since 2007. They say The Journal, often Mr. Murdochs first read of the day, must move away from subjects of interest to established business leaders and widen its scope if it wants to succeed in the years to come. The Journal of the future, they say, must pay more attention to social media trends and cover racial disparities in health care, for example, as aggressively as it pursues corporate mergers. That argument has yet to convince executives in the top ranks of the company. The Journal got digital publishing right before anyone else. It was one of the few news organizations to charge readers for online access starting in 1996, during the days of dial-up internet. At the time, most other publications, including The New York Times, bought into the mantra that information wants to be free and ended up paying dearly for what turned out to be a misguided business strategy.
As thousands of papers across the country folded, The Journal, with its nearly 1,300-person news staff, made money, thanks to its prescient digital strategy. While that inoculated The Journal against the ravages wrought by an array of unlikely newcomers, from Craigslist to Facebook, it also kept the paper from innovating further. The editor leading the news organization as it figures out how to attract new readers without alienating loyal subscribers is Matt Murray, 54, who got the top job in 2018. He has worked at The Journal for two decades, and his promotion was welcomed by many in the newsroom. Soon after, he assembled a strategy team focused on bringing in new digital subscribers. To oversee the group, Mr. Murray hired Louise Story, a journalist whose career included a decade at The New York Times. She was given a sweeping mandate, marking her as a potential future leader of the paper. She commands a staff of 150 as chief news strategist and chief product and technology officer. Her team helped compile a significant audit of the newsrooms practices in an effort to boost subscribers and now plays a key role in the newsroom as audience experts, advising other editors on internet-search tactics (getting noticed by Google) and social media to help increase readership.
As the team was completing a report on its findings last summer, Mr. Murray found himself staring down a newsroom revolt. Soon after the killing of George Floyd, staff members created a private Slack channel called Newsroomies, where they discussed how The Journal, in their view, was behind on major stories of the day, including the social justice movement growing in the aftermath of Mr. Floyds death. Participants also complained that The Journals digital presence was not robust enough, and that its conservative opinion department had published essays that did not meet standards applied to the reporting staff. The tensions and challenges are similar to what leaders of other news organizations, including The Times, have heard from their staffs. In July, Mr. Murray received a draft from Ms. Storys team, a 209-page blueprint on how The Journal should remake itself called The Content Review. It noted that in the past five years, we have had six quarters where we lost more subscribers than we gained, and said addressing its slow-growing audience called for significant changes in everything from the papers social media strategy to the subjects it deemed newsworthy.
The report argued that the paper should attract new readers specifically, women, people of color and younger professionals by focusing more on topics such as climate change and income inequality. Among its suggestions: We also strongly recommend putting muscle behind efforts to feature more women and people of color in all of our stories. The Content Review has not been formally shared with the newsroom and its recommendations have not been put into effect, but it is influencing how people work: An impasse over the report has led to a divided newsroom, according to interviews with 25 current and former staff members. The company, they say, has avoided making the proposed changes because a brewing power struggle between Mr. Murray and the new publisher, Almar Latour, has contributed to a stalemate that threatens the future of The Journal. Mr. Murray and Mr. Latour, 50, represent two extremes of the model Murdoch employee. Mr. Murray is the tactful editor; Mr. Latour is the brash entrepreneur. The two rose within the organization at roughly the same time. When the moment came to replace Gerry Baker as the top editor in 2018, both were seen as contenders.
snip
malaise
(269,013 posts)Celerity
(43,389 posts)Celerity
(43,389 posts)smb
(3,471 posts)Bettie
(16,110 posts)if at all.
Celerity
(43,389 posts)Ocelot II
(115,711 posts)If they are being given light sentences it's more likely because they are overwhelmed by having to prosecute hundreds of these goons in addition to their usual cases, and because many of the cases involve misdemeanor trespassing on government property, a charge that doesn't carry a stiff penalty anyhow.
Wuddles440
(1,123 posts)the AG establishes the priorities and initiatives for the DOJ and the USAs in the respective districts are then responsible for implementing the directives. The AUSAs (line prosecutors), while having some discretionary latitude, are ultimately obligated to follow the departmental policies and directives (set by the AG). The prosecution of the insurrectionist should be the highest priority and those involved in this seditious act should be subjected to the most severe penalties. Considering the significance of the attempted coup and its notoriety in the public forum, charging the participants with minor misdemeanors reflects an institutional desire to minimize the gravity of the actual criminal acts and erase the memory of the heinous incident from the public forum as expeditiously as possible.
ecstatic
(32,705 posts)walkingman
(7,620 posts)much harsher sentences for much lessor crimes. What about the 5 Capitol Police Officers that are dead and the over 140 wounded?
The message being sent is that there is no accountability.
Joinfortmill
(14,425 posts)Funtatlaguy
(10,877 posts)Boydog
(718 posts)triron
(22,006 posts)Where's the history lesson, Mr AG?
Ocelot II
(115,711 posts)Do you have any idea how complex and time-consuming any federal prosecution is, let alone one involving the prosecution of a former president and other administration officials? Or that criminal investigations are not conducted in public in order that potential defendants can't find out whether they will be prosecuted and for what, not to mention so they can't destroy or falsify evidence or threaten, intimidate or bribe potential witnesses, juries or judges? Prosecuting TFG and his goons will be just like a mob prosecution.
Garland took over a gutted, demoralized and corrupted DoJ only about eight months ago. It took more than two years for a functioning DoJ just to indict the major Watergate defendants. Don't assume that nothing is being done just because we aren't getting daily press briefings.
Boydog
(718 posts)Should land their asses in jail. With Trumps kind, you have to fight fire with fire.
Ocelot II
(115,711 posts)There's a process whereby the House has to authorize the enforcement of the subpoenas, and DoJ has no power to enforce them until the House tells them to do it.
PortTack
(32,771 posts)triron
(22,006 posts)Ocelot II
(115,711 posts)MOMFUDSKI
(5,546 posts)"they" are all in it together. Hope I am SO wrong. Talk me down.
Funtatlaguy
(10,877 posts)Or resign.
dalton99a
(81,512 posts)who are hell bent on overthrowing our government by force and violence
Danmark
(39 posts)Nine months later and nothing. WTF is wrong?
Ocelot II
(115,711 posts)And at that time there was a functioning DoJ, not the gutted shell Garland inherited from TFG and Bill Barr.
triron
(22,006 posts)boston bean
(36,221 posts)He doesnt want to make news o fears emboldening them further and entrenching them.
Think ruby ridge and Waco.
Ocelot II
(115,711 posts)SoCalDavidS
(9,998 posts)Do you not think President Biden knew exactly what he was getting?
TFG knew what he was getting when he picked Barr. Bill may not have stuck around when it came time to try and overthrow the election, but 99% of everything else he did during his tenure, was pretty much what TFG wanted him to do.
I think there is ZERO chance Biden does anything to Mr. Garland, or criticizes him in ANY way.
Grasswire2
(13,570 posts)....and waiting for public outcry to demand adjudication of MAGA criminals.
And hoping to get the first two done before the third blows up the country in Civil War.
And that's why I will push back against anyone here on DU who tries to tamp down demands for action.
Let the people speak, everyone.
boston bean
(36,221 posts)Grasswire2
(13,570 posts)I had just read a comment where DUers were called whiners for expressing their opinions.
:-/
brooklynite
(94,581 posts)Strangely, none of the people complaining about the unacceptable schedule for indictments and prosecutions have a professional background in criminal justice.
Ocelot II
(115,711 posts)or doctors who've been dragging Dr. Fauci for recommending vaccinations and masks instead of Clorox and livestock dewormer.
Grasswire2
(13,570 posts)Let the people speak.
No need to hammer rank and file Democrats when they express an opinion.
brooklynite
(94,581 posts)I have no objection to someone saying theyr unhappy with how long its taking. I DO have an objection to people saying his Garland isnt doing an acceptable job (which, by implication, means that Biden isnt doing an acceptable job either).
Grasswire2
(13,570 posts)And maybe your wife would like to address us directly.
My husband worked as Chief of Audit for a multi-state region of IRS. But my opinion about taxes or anyone's liability would be worth diddly squat.
brooklynite
(94,581 posts)
in her preparation of cases far less serious than indicting a former President.
Perhaps you feel that you know hes guilty is an adequate argument?
Grasswire2
(13,570 posts)It doesn't exist.
brooklynite
(94,581 posts)Boydog
(718 posts)When you are fighting thugs and criminals who are ok with demolishing the constitution and doing away with our democracy, the only thing to do is to eliminate them. With Merrick Garland, I hope Im not seeing the return of Neville Chamberlain
brooklynite
(94,581 posts)Boydog
(718 posts)about being concerned about radicalizing domestic terrorists from jail terms, he is part of the problem. Being tough with these people and punishing them to the letter of the law might just save our way of life.
ymetca
(1,182 posts)One might argue that lighter sentences for those with no history of arrest and genuine penitence would be in order. That's the "cooler heads" argument, which keeps the lunatics from worse acts of violence.
But it seems to me the argument isn't really about all these low-hanging fruit, but about the goons that started this not being held to full account.
And we all know who was atop this steaming pile of crap, and still spewing bile.
He needs to go down, and go down hard, for all this to really start tapering off.
Does Garland have the guts? We'll see.
Response to Boydog (Original post)
Marius25 This message was self-deleted by its author.
BlueIdaho
(13,582 posts)But Attorney General? Im not so sure.