4
- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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: Remember kids, there is no such thing as lawfare…
Posted on 11/11/26 at 1:56 pm to the808bass
Posted on 11/11/26 at 1:56 pm to the808bass
quote:
lol. “What I said, I didn’t say.”
Don't act like one of them.
Saying "lawfare" has never been properly defined =/= saying lawfare doesn't exist.
Without a proper, universal definition, the statement of whether it does or doesn't exist isn't logically possible
Posted on 11/11/26 at 1:59 pm to SlowFlowPro
Hey SFP, is there no such thing as lawfare?
I heard there’s no such thing as lawfare.
I heard there’s no such thing as lawfare.
Posted on 11/11/26 at 1:59 pm to roadGator
quote:
is there no such thing as lawfare?
Couldn't tell ya
Posted on 11/11/26 at 2:18 pm to Placekicker
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here. AOC says the Democrats are looking at impeaching Supreme Court justices for "legalizing Trump's criminality."
Obviously she means Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas.
KBJ, Kagen and Sotomayor are safe because they rule the "right" way.
And you thought they were gonna focus on gas prices?
Lawfare isn’t a worry if you think the “right” way
This post was edited on 11/11/26 at 2:20 pm
Posted on 11/11/26 at 2:20 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Saying "lawfare" has never been properly defined =/= saying lawfare doesn't exist. Without a proper, universal definition, the statement of whether it does or doesn't exist isn't logically possible
Only if you’re a fricking retard.
Posted on 11/11/26 at 2:36 pm to SlowFlowPro
How about this:
lawfare - the use of civil or criminal process, especially by a party or politicians in power, against political enemies when such legal process is driven primarily by the intent to harm a political rival.
I just made this up, but I think it's close enough for discussion.
At least from where I sit, President Trump has been a victim of lawfare, and he also wielded it as a weapon. Democrats have done the same; indeed, they started it, at least with respect to him.
I would love to see lawfare recede, but it is hard to imagine with the rising time of Democrats giddy about prosecuting crimes they've yet to identify,.
lawfare - the use of civil or criminal process, especially by a party or politicians in power, against political enemies when such legal process is driven primarily by the intent to harm a political rival.
I just made this up, but I think it's close enough for discussion.
At least from where I sit, President Trump has been a victim of lawfare, and he also wielded it as a weapon. Democrats have done the same; indeed, they started it, at least with respect to him.
I would love to see lawfare recede, but it is hard to imagine with the rising time of Democrats giddy about prosecuting crimes they've yet to identify,.
Posted on 11/11/26 at 2:36 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Saying "lawfare" has never been properly defined =/= saying lawfare doesn't exist.
Without a proper, universal definition, the statement of whether it does or doesn't exist isn't logically possible
Who the frick is supposed to define this so you will stop this shite?
Wikipedia? CNN? Lady Gaga?
There will certainly never be a universal ruling to define that specific term.
However it is used here and everywhere in between to clearly communicate the use of the justice system (which whether you like it or not is inherently politically biased depending on who the people are that are adjudicating the case) to try and strongarm someone that is not politically aligned with those that are initiating the "investigation."
It's the reason certain cases get conveniently sent to certain courts that offer a more favorable outcome. You're a fricking lawyer and you know this.
So that's it. That's the definition for the purposes of this website. SPeak to that when you hear the term lawfare. Give your opinions based on that contect and stop the fricking games man.
Posted on 11/11/26 at 2:38 pm to Jax Teller
quote:
stop the fricking games man.
This is like asking him to stop breathing.
Posted on 11/11/26 at 2:40 pm to Jax Teller
Trump needs to just go ahead and give/sign pre-emptive blanket pardons to EVERYONE in his administration, staff, cabinet, etc. F the dems.
Posted on 11/11/26 at 2:43 pm to BFIV
quote:
If I was Trump, each and every time the Democrats brought forward a name or person to "investigate" with their lawfare, I would immediately issue a pardon for that individual. Do it one at a time, every time the Dems issue a subpoena or "investigation". He can do this for the next two years.
Yep.
If Biden can pardon people the way he did, Trump can too.
Posted on 11/11/26 at 2:43 pm to roadGator
quote:
Hey SFP, is there no such thing as lawfare?
I heard there’s no such thing as lawfare
Slippin' Jimmy says "That [D]epends."
Posted on 11/11/26 at 2:44 pm to the808bass
quote:
This is like asking him to stop breathing.
I legit can't fricking stand people like him. People like him have such a distorted high opinion of their own intellect that they are incapable of grasping the very thing that makes someone truly smart. The ability to know your own limitations.
Posted on 11/11/26 at 2:54 pm to N.O. via West-Cal
quote:
lawfare - the use of civil or criminal process, especially by a party or politicians in power, against political enemies when such legal process is driven primarily by the intent to harm a political rival.
I just made this up, but I think it's close enough for discussion.
What these discussions always devolve into is a discussion about legitimacy.
Perceived illegitimate actions = lawfare
Perceived legitimate actions = not lawfare
And that legitimacy is almost always built around the team concept
Posted on 11/11/26 at 2:59 pm to Jax Teller
quote:
Who the frick is supposed to define this so you will stop this shite?
The definition is largely personal.
Rebel did it best with the punting obscenity definition a few months ago
quote:
There will certainly never be a universal ruling to define that specific term.
Not only that. There will never be universal application of that term, either.
ETA: If you'd like an amazing display of this in action, with another echo chamber term, go read the BRICS thread and see how "globalism" is being used.
This post was edited on 11/11/26 at 3:02 pm
Posted on 11/11/26 at 3:07 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
What does double jeopardy have to do with Congressional investigations?
Double jeopardy exists because of the lawfare you pretend to not grasp because you'd rather distract and troll.
Posted on 11/11/26 at 3:09 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
SlowFlowPro
1) Lawfare
2) Southern Border
3) Donald Trump's Multiple Attacks by the Political Establishment
4) J6
5) 2020 Election
6) Globalism
7) FBI Raid on Trump's Home
8) Trump/Russia Collusion
9) Brandon's DOJ Masterminding Bogus Charges Against Trump Before the 2024 Election
10) 2 Bogus Impeachment Trials (2019-2020)
Congratulations, bro. You've been dead wrong on every single one of these issues over the past decade. You're either 1) A TDS-Obsessed liar or 2) The most clueless person on this board, or 3) Both.
Page 3 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News