(no title)
tremorscript | 2 years ago
However, some of your talking points I suspect are coming from the WSJ which I think is the Cory for the other side.
Philosophically, I think one must not be afraid to lose, it leads to inaction.
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/34397551-the-chickenshit...
DannyBee|2 years ago
Even if you just throw out the clear astroturfing, you will find this - there are plenty of people who believe that amazon, et al are doing a lot of harm, but that she is not going to be able to the fix that effectively with the current approach.
Plus, again, the people who do this for a living in her organization don't buy it either. I've met a number of them over the years living in DC (plenty of then had been there a long ass time). These are people who believe in the overall mission, but think the tactics are bad.
71 senior-level attorneys left in 2021-2022 (99 total but 27 were planned retirements, so let's give them a pass).
That's a lot for them - the most in decades.
https://news.bloomberglaw.com/antitrust/senior-ftc-staff-dep...
I'm not sure how you can look at all of this and think it's working well.
She's even now arguing that the fact that she's losing means that Congress should give her more power.
This is overall a bad tactical plan.
It's fine to lose occasionally. Constantly losing like she is doesn't work though.
The book you cite doesn't even try to argue that losing often is a good idea (AFAIK, it's been a while since I read it. It was a tough read)
That's the thing - cases are winnable, just not by completely out there theories.
Take one of them to task on something with only moderate or mild extension of current legal theories. You don't need the world's strongest remedy. You just need to win.
Then use that to extend your theories a little more and then a little more and a little more.
That is how this works - small change until the large thing you wanted to achieve is just a step away.
This approach has been wildly successful, both for conservatives and liberals in the courts.
The attempts at sudden leaps sometimes works, but like it's a few percent vs very high % by strategically moving forward.
Once you do that, admiral tarkin was right, "fear will keep the other systems in line"
Large companies were afraid of what happened to MS, even though it wasn't broken up. This let the next group of small companies grow big.
Nobody is afraid of anyone who loses constantly.
(And the ninth circuit just denied their bid to stay the judge's order. Of any circuit that might bite, the ninth would be the one)
tremorscript|2 years ago
Luckily, I think everyone agrees that corporate power is bad.
An Antitrust judiciary hearing happened one day after she lost the MS case. She actually received support from Republicans. Maybe change is coming. Maybe even the republicans see how bad some of these judgements are. The MS one was especially very poorly written.
I think she will be here for a while.
The article:- https://prospect.org/power/2023-07-14-jim-jordan-misfires-at...