- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Lawfare: how is this defined, and how can it be (legally) stopped?
Posted on 4/27/24 at 9:37 am to OceanMan
Posted on 4/27/24 at 9:37 am to OceanMan
quote:
Wrong, “criminals” implies they are targeting a crime, not an individual.
Tomato tomato.
You're arguing legitimacy, now. The wheel keeps spinning.
quote:
we both know you are weaseling down this hall of obscurity because you don’t want to discuss specifically that the prosecutions of Trump are targeted.
No. I'm willing to accept that these prosecutions are targeted. But that means we're going to have to bring tens of thousands of prosecutions into the discussion as also being targeted. I don't think Patriots are going to want to do that, in particular. They're refusal to do so, however, largely invalidates this "lawfare" idea.
quote:
No, the legislature does not decide which cases to prosecute.
The frick does a prosecutor have to do with a civil lawsuit?
quote:
Your refusal to discuss Letitia James’ campaign against Trump
Politicians are politicians.
Your argument only works if you're claiming the criminal prosecutions are not legitimate, even if a jury disagrees with you.
2
Posted on 4/27/24 at 9:43 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:Then we have a fundamental disagreement about equal application of the law, Mr. Beria.
Wrong, “criminals” implies they are targeting a crime, not an individual.
Tomato tomato.
Posted on 4/27/24 at 9:46 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
quote:Wrong, “criminals” implies they are targeting a crime, not an individual.
Tomato tomato.
How ironic is this quote? We have to go through your mastercalss of the malleability of the term “lawfare”, but the distinction I made above is not meaningful?
What a clown.
quote:
No. I'm willing to accept that these prosecutions are targeted. But that means we're going to have to bring tens of thousands of prosecutions into the discussion as also being targeted
no that’s not what it means. We don’t ever have to have straw man arguments. quote:
I don't think Patriots are going to want to do that, in particular. They're refusal to do so, however, largely invalidates this "lawfare" idea.
Non partisan. We all see your agenda but you. It’s embarrassing.
quote:
The frick does a prosecutor have to do with a civil lawsuit?
Hers what the AG of New York has to say about it.
quote:
Politicians are politicians. Your argument only works if you're claiming the criminal prosecutions are not legitimate, even if a jury disagrees with you.
Take the L.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News