re: California to open special session preparing for anti-Trump lawsuits

quote:

---

you go 20 pages defending every bullshite Trump case

---

"Defending"? No.

Explaining how they're legal without our current system.

Hypocrites will still willingly lick boots even with the Mother of all examples staring them in the face (which they rage over).

This is exactly why the hypocrisy around "lawfare" becomes such a point of focus. It's a crutch for people. As I said earlier

quote:

---

The biggest conceptual issue is they want to define it in a way to attack the legitimacy of the underlying claims, which poses a gordian knot. What they REALLY want is a "I know it when I see it" definition so it can be lawfare when they're the victim but legitimate when their perceived opponent is the victim, but that requires legitimacy as a one-way street.

So, like with facts, to create the asymmetry in legitimacy, they have to attack the specific institutions to delegitimize them on an ad hoc basis.

---

LINK

quote:

---

Trump was a nothing politically until 2016, so that is easy.

---

Your statement would be more accurate if you said the social media era.

But your TDS had to show up.

quote:

---

I'm not claiming that. If you had someone with a legit didactic memory (which isn't that common, if it exists at all), they could probably do that with Barbri and some writing background...and an IQ over 110.

---

Didactic or eidetic?