General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Rachel is really slamming the DOJ under Merrick Garland, everything from not doing anything [View all]H2O Man
(73,231 posts)I was wrong to make it sound like everyone who thinks differently on the DoJ lacks insight, and/or does not have a valuable opinion. Most of all, I apologize to you, a Good Thinker who I have much respect for. I own that mistake, and should have more self-discipline than to post when I am in a grumpy mood.
I do think, however, that there are members here who do not grasp how the DoJ works .....just as there are some who think everything the administration does hits the bull's eye. In the context of the DoJ in this instance -- or instances -- it would seem to me that those who are motivated enough to post positive or negative comments should have a good idea about what they are talking about.
That includes understanding the dynamics that involve both the form and substance within the DoJ. What each is, and how they can relate in potentially positive or negative ways. Or both, because federal law enforcement is rarely simple. More, even those in the general public with a good grasp on how some-to-all of the DoJ workings go, can not and do not know what is going on within the department now, except for what they release to the media -- or the lawyer for someone in trouble leaks information. For we only see that tip of the ice cube that is above the surface.