I worked in the timber industry in Montana for 27 years. I managed sawmills most of that time. For many years the mills I managed struggled to survive due to a lack of logs, and some of this due to the environmental groups like Earth First. These people made my life difficult. However, like Ben says, she should be judged on what she has did over the last few decades, not what she did when she was a college kid. I hope she gets confirmed for the position.Appointee fights are red meat for the base, but the vast majority of the American people don't know, and don't care. My crystal ball is busted on elections, so I'm not good at calling the winner next year.
I agree. She messed up big time. As to the immunity question, she was guilty of participating in the mailing of the letter, which could be construed as part of the conspiracy to spike trees. She wasn't the one who spiked the trees, just retyped the letter, not on her own computer, which shows she knew the illegal action that was being taken, and that she tried to obscure her involvement. This was all during the timber wars, if folks remember those. There was a lot of hinky chit going on with both sides here (bomb threats, death threats, etc to enviros, etc). The conflict was escalating and good people were doing really stupid things.
That's not an excuse, btw, that's context.
So she copied & typed a letter in a manner that obscured her involvement, mailed a letter that connoted the existence of spikes in trees & later, when approached about that illegal activity, and having distance from the Blount character, which she and others had described as violent & temperamental (and that they feared for their safety from him), she rolls to avoid the co-conspirator charge. I think that is taking responsibility for those actions. Not taking responsibility would be to stonewall, obfuscate more & deny involvement. Was it tremendously stupid to send that letter & be involved in Earth First? Absolutely. Does it disqualify her for being the head of BLM? I don't think so.
Because that's not the defining mark in her career. If she had continued to be a part of Earth First, and went on to be a domestic terrorist, then sure, no nod. But, in her professional career, she has been the antithisis of the Earth First movement. She's been a collaborator with timber companies, miners, etc. People grow & abandon their old ways. That's natural and if you don't grow and become more wisened & mature, then you're not a stable individual, imo.
So she made some really stupid mistakes in college, worked to atone for those and her body of work in the last 30 years should be the defining trait on whether or not she should be confirmed.
That work has been all about bringing various stakeholders together to achieve lasting outcomes.
Tracy is in. Based on what I've gathered, I also agree she naively followed along with a crowd. It's not exactly the linchpin for hanging.However, like Ben says, she should be judged on what she has did over the last few decades, not what she did when she was a college kid.
Politics. It's not the best person for the job... it's, Theodore Roosevelt's defined, Boss Party Politics.I'm not really frustrated that she was hired despite her past. Not nearly as important as the policies she supports now. Hopefully she'll do a good job.
I am frustrated that the standards of behavior for what gets u hired/fired seem arbitrary and selectively enforced.