The result of this was NAACP v Alabama, a Warren court decision protecting the identities of these individuals. Unfortunately, SCOTUS leaned on this case to protect the identities of wealthy donors in California—people who have never faced organized, quasi-state threats of harm over their donations

And you just avoided mine

It was below 10,000 at the time IIRC. The Dow doesn't track with inflation per se, but would probably be in the 200,000-300,000 range?

In the wake of that, Roberts was free to do as he did. Why wouldn't he be? What did he have to fear?

Leadership, or the lack thereof, has very real impacts, not just in what people do, but even in what they think.

Garland could have compiled a much stronger story. Instead he trusted in a strategy that was fundamentally set by two Trump appointees, and that chance was blown.

A failure.

By comparison, look at the way Trump has used his bully pulpit to convince many that things which factually happened (the insurrection and his role in forging it, the Russian connections) did not happen.

3.5 years after Garland took office.

The point that elected Dems (and emptywheel) miss, evade, avoid, is that strong leadership has a way of influencing downstream events. And whatever you think about his abikity to change the outcome, Garland did not provide strong leadership.

(And there's no way of knowing what Roberts would have felt he could get away with if an assertive AG investigated the ringleaders starting day 1.)

Your point is besides the point.

Absolutely. Garland did everything perfectly—Roberts and Roberts alone bears responsibility.

Excellent. We need a group like that to do just this.

No one ever should have trusted him after he called for the DJIA to be at 36,000...in the year 2000.

Urgh. No, sorry. He would have been just as terrible there. We dodged a bullet...only to get hit with a sledgehammer.

He's not a bad person, just in no way qualified for either service.

He did because he judged that he could do it and not completely demolish his reputation. An assertive AG might have altered that calculation.

We all know immunity has nothing to do with the Constitution. The Supreme Court is a political body that makes political calculations like any other.

I would like to know if he has someone who loves him enough to tell him how clueless he sounds.

"Do you think the American people know Dems support the healthcare package we passed 15 years ago, which the GOP has been trying to kill ever since?"

Careful. Pretty soon he's going to figure out that the GOP doesn't like taxes either.

Don't disagree, but they still aren't leadership material. Not enough for the Senate. A party of backbenchers.

They are certified idiots. Dems didn't whip Rs in the recent elections because of healthcare. It was because we saw Dems actually fighting (or so we thought).

Kaine is just so frigging oblivious....

I hate that all. As someone who grew up reading LOTR multiple times and rejects the nanobrains that are perverting it— it's just offensive.