dal said this: “Local lawyer Jim Hudson’s proposal for independent and possibly pro bono counsel and the idea of asking the Department of Justice for help are not necessarily mutually exclusive. Hudson’s idea, while nebulous to some ears, at best would allow those most affected by the intrusions—Coffee voters—to participate in a bottom-up inquiry into all aspects of the breach and its aftermath, aided by the independent counsel and able to notify the Justice Department of any criminality discovered. The Department of Justice, by contrast, boasts multistate range and federal muscle, but without a strong defense of the local public interest in place, they would risk being seen, fairly or not, as just another set of politicized outsiders, at worst sparking more resentment than repair.” wtf is he saying?
ChatGPT
Dal is discussing two different approaches to addressing a breach (likely a legal or ethical breach) that has impacted voters in Coffee, a local area. Let's break down the key points:
Dal is saying that these two approaches aren't mutually exclusive; they could potentially be used together. However, he points out some concerns:
In summary, Dal is highlighting the potential benefits and drawbacks of both local and federal involvement in investigating a breach that affects local voters. He suggests that a combination of local, independent investigation with the option to involve the DOJ if necessary could be a balanced approach, allowing thorough local involvement and scrutiny while retaining the option to escalate the matter to a federal level if serious criminality is uncovered.