1
- 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: SFPLCs buddy spills the beans on Lawfare
Posted on 10/21/26 at 1:28 pm to captainFid
Posted on 10/21/26 at 1:28 pm to captainFid
quote:
Put a fork in it, this threads done.
This is true. The thread is done, SFP has accomplished his goal, in theory. The truth is that his presence on threads puts a spotlight on the subject and proves the significance of it. We can thank him for that.
Posted on 10/21/26 at 1:29 pm to Azkiger
Posted on 10/21/26 at 1:29 pm to Azkiger
quote:
An unequal application of the law is still lawfare.
She never argued for an unequal application of the law, either.
Another assumption.
Posted on 10/21/26 at 1:30 pm to BurlesonCountyAg
quote:
This is true. The thread is done,
he says about a thread titled:
quote:
SFPLCs buddy spills the beans on Lawfare
Posted on 10/21/26 at 1:33 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Still waiting on an operative definition of this
quote:
"Lawfare is the use of legal proceedings, laws, or the court system as a weapon to achieve political, financial, or strategic goals rather than simply to resolve a legitimate legal dispute".
The word combines “law” and “warfare.”
Posted on 10/21/26 at 1:35 pm to Diamondawg
quote:
rather than simply to resolve a legitimate legal dispute".
That legitimacy qualifier eliminates about 99% of what is called "lawfare" on here.
Posted on 10/21/26 at 1:36 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
She never argued for an unequal application of the law, either.
Another assumption.
I never said she argued for that.
The issue with what she said was she admitted that one of her motivations was to prevent young individuals from joining such administrations because doing so would "buy them a lot of problems".
That would be an example of lawfare.
Posted on 10/21/26 at 1:37 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Still waiting on an operative definition of this
Wait no longer:
Lawfare is the strategic use of legal systems, lawsuits, or regulatory processes to purposely intimidate, hinder, damage, delegitimize or defeat a political adversary rather than using traditional political competition. In other words, rather than settling political disputes through elections or legislative debate, actors use the court of law as a surrogate political battlefield.
If you need something a bit shorter, it's the mobilization of law as a weapon of conflict.
Posted on 10/21/26 at 1:37 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
about 99% of what is called "lawfare" on here.
Your 99% is an extremely malleable number
Posted on 10/21/26 at 1:38 pm to SlowFlowPro
I mean, you showed up and are circling her like a fly circling shite. She's one of yours, clearly.
Posted on 10/21/26 at 1:40 pm to Bard
quote:
Wait no longer:
This is at least the 3rd definition used by page 3.
quote:
Lawfare is the strategic use of legal systems, lawsuits, or regulatory processes to purposely intimidate, hinder, damage, delegitimize or defeat a political adversary rather than using traditional political competition. In other words, rather than settling political disputes through elections or legislative debate, actors use the court of law as a surrogate political battlefield.
If you need something a bit shorter, it's the mobilization of law as a weapon of conflict.
So legitimate prosecutions of actual criminal behavior are "lawfare" if a person from one party controls the prosecuting arm of the accused?
Posted on 10/21/26 at 1:42 pm to Azkiger
quote:
was she admitted that one of her motivations was to prevent young individuals from joining such administrations
She did not use the word "prevent" either directly or referentially.
Did you watch the video?
This is your 2nd or 3rd time incorrectly representing what she actually said
Posted on 10/21/26 at 1:45 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Which example of lawfare are you referencing,
Where in my post did I discuss any cases? I asked a basic question.
The OP video shows Slotkin using the threat of legal trouble for future employees in Trump's admin as deterrence for working for him.
Are you ok with that suggestion?
Posted on 10/21/26 at 1:46 pm to deathvalleytiger10
quote:
The OP video shows Slotkin using the threat of legal trouble for future employees in Trump's admin as deterrence for working for him.
Are you ok with that suggestion?
Why do you want to prevent prosecuting people who broke the law?
Posted on 10/21/26 at 1:47 pm to Decatur
fig
Posted on 10/21/26 at 1:49 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
operative definition
The strategic use of legal systems, courts, and litigation as a weapon to harm, weaken, or control an adversary rather than to seek traditional justice.
It's kind of how an entity can be guilty as shite of something illegal against an individual, but have more money and resources than the individual. Thus said individual would go bankrupt trying to defend themselves. Even if they knew they'd prevail.
That happened to individuals who questioned 2020 and those who were not guilty of the sham charges of Jan 6th
Posted on 10/21/26 at 1:50 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Why do you want to prevent prosecuting people who broke the law?
I will take your answer that, yes, you do agree with her using threats of punishment for merely being employed in the Trump Administration as being ok.
Posted on 10/21/26 at 1:52 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Why do you want to prevent prosecuting people who broke the law?
So joining the Trump administration is now considered "breaking the law"?
Posted on 10/21/26 at 1:52 pm to deathvalleytiger10
quote:
ou do agree with her using threats of punishment for merely being employed in the Trump Administration as being ok.
You're leaving out the "breaking the law" part
Posted on 10/21/26 at 1:54 pm to riccoar
quote:
The strategic use of legal systems, courts, and litigation as a weapon to harm, weaken, or control an adversary rather than to seek traditional justice.
This also is similar to DD's re:legitimacy.
Legitimate prosecutions or lawsuits are part of "traditional justice" and therefore don't fall into this definition.
quote:
That happened to individuals who questioned 2020
Who?
quote:
and those who were not guilty of the sham charges of Jan 6th
Oh Jesus Christ. This is NOT where youw ant to go if "traditional justice" excludes lawfare.
There were PLENTY of legitimate criminals on J6
Page 3 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News