Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse

The New Coffee Room

  1. TNCR
  2. General Discussion
  3. This week in lawfare

This week in lawfare

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General Discussion
97 Posts 11 Posters 6.4k Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • 89th8 Offline
    89th8 Offline
    89th
    wrote on last edited by 89th
    #84

    Maybe he'd rather not engage in this incredibly unbecoming and dangerous game of political petulant retribution. But at least the swamp is drained!

    1 Reply Last reply
    • HoraceH Offline
      HoraceH Offline
      Horace
      wrote on last edited by
      #85

      Maybe the legal system is way more malleable than we think, and people can in fact be factually convicted of crimes, if the powers that be would like to factually convict them. Laws are written in human language, and human language is notoriously inexact.

      Education is extremely important.

      1 Reply Last reply
      • 89th8 Offline
        89th8 Offline
        89th
        wrote on last edited by
        #86

        Yeah the system certainly has a bunch of slack in the line. Prosecutorial discretion, plea deals, and so forth. Lots of gray area. A President going after people who said mean things about him does not have as much gray area. Sorry, grey* area, @Doctor-Phibes

        1 Reply Last reply
        • jon-nycJ Offline
          jon-nycJ Offline
          jon-nyc
          wrote on last edited by
          #87

          Captain and Senator Mark Kelly

          Person. Woman. Man. Camera. TV.

          1 Reply Last reply
          • MikM Offline
            MikM Offline
            Mik
            wrote on last edited by
            #88

            That was a judicious response, but the idea that ANYTHING our government does anymore is impartial is laughable.

            "You cannot subsidize irresponsibility and expect people to become more responsible." — Thomas Sowell

            1 Reply Last reply
            • jon-nycJ Offline
              jon-nycJ Offline
              jon-nyc
              wrote on last edited by jon-nyc
              #89

              How was it a judicious response? How could just stating the law be subject to court martial?

              Anyway go ahead and make a martyr out of him so Newsom has some competition.

              Person. Woman. Man. Camera. TV.

              1 Reply Last reply
              • MikM Offline
                MikM Offline
                Mik
                wrote on last edited by
                #90

                Context, man, context. The congresscritter video was hardly judicious.

                "You cannot subsidize irresponsibility and expect people to become more responsible." — Thomas Sowell

                1 Reply Last reply
                • jon-nycJ Offline
                  jon-nycJ Offline
                  jon-nyc
                  wrote last edited by
                  #91

                  Person. Woman. Man. Camera. TV.

                  Andrea BA 1 Reply Last reply
                  • jon-nycJ jon-nyc

                    Andrea BA Offline
                    Andrea BA Offline
                    Andrea B
                    wrote last edited by
                    #92

                    @jon-nyc apparently the attorney who's representing this government is rather...inexperienced. His previous position was something tax-related.

                    Is the DOJ going to go after all the "8647" merch on Amazon?

                    https://www.amazon.com/s?k=8647&crid=2U5TLYPYC1MQY&sprefix=8647%2Caps%2C182&ref=nb_sb_noss_1

                    jon-nycJ 1 Reply Last reply
                    • kluursK Offline
                      kluursK Offline
                      kluurs
                      wrote last edited by kluurs
                      #93

                      As with Trump's past life, the law is to be used a bludgeon - a tool that a minimum requires the adversary to spend a great deal of time and money in self defense. On a recommendation of John Kiriakou I've started reading this book that pretty much says if they want to come after you, you've probably done something that qualifies. Kiriakou tells the story of a woman on Hawaii who had a whale watching business. Someone posted a video of whale watching on her boat when a passenger blew a whistle. That violated a federal law - and over the next few years she essentially lost everything to legal expenses. If they want to destroy you, they can - and will. Discretion of prosecutors is not always reasonable. Another case I heard of was of a woman who when she was 10 years old was bullied by boy. In an act of revenge, she pulled down his pants on a playground. As a 10 year old, she was prosecuted for a sex crime and required to be listed as a sex criminal. She ended up having to leave the country. Even the boy involved admitted it had NOTHING to do with sex.
                      64e6af6c-74eb-4bc7-a58b-f43c2675da7f-image.jpeg

                      Andrea BA 1 Reply Last reply
                      • kluursK kluurs

                        As with Trump's past life, the law is to be used a bludgeon - a tool that a minimum requires the adversary to spend a great deal of time and money in self defense. On a recommendation of John Kiriakou I've started reading this book that pretty much says if they want to come after you, you've probably done something that qualifies. Kiriakou tells the story of a woman on Hawaii who had a whale watching business. Someone posted a video of whale watching on her boat when a passenger blew a whistle. That violated a federal law - and over the next few years she essentially lost everything to legal expenses. If they want to destroy you, they can - and will. Discretion of prosecutors is not always reasonable. Another case I heard of was of a woman who when she was 10 years old was bullied by boy. In an act of revenge, she pulled down his pants on a playground. As a 10 year old, she was prosecuted for a sex crime and required to be listed as a sex criminal. She ended up having to leave the country. Even the boy involved admitted it had NOTHING to do with sex.
                        64e6af6c-74eb-4bc7-a58b-f43c2675da7f-image.jpeg

                        Andrea BA Offline
                        Andrea BA Offline
                        Andrea B
                        wrote last edited by
                        #94

                        @kluurs Kiriakou has some experience with the process being the punishment.

                        I have little doubt that this is the case here.

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        • Andrea BA Andrea B

                          @jon-nyc apparently the attorney who's representing this government is rather...inexperienced. His previous position was something tax-related.

                          Is the DOJ going to go after all the "8647" merch on Amazon?

                          https://www.amazon.com/s?k=8647&crid=2U5TLYPYC1MQY&sprefix=8647%2Caps%2C182&ref=nb_sb_noss_1

                          jon-nycJ Offline
                          jon-nycJ Offline
                          jon-nyc
                          wrote last edited by
                          #95

                          @Andrea-B

                          Ken White put it this way:

                          No rational person could see that and say “the former director of the FBI is saying he’s going to kill the President"!”
                          I could now cite to you a legion of cases for that proposition, finding rhetoric far more concerning than this protected by the First Amendment, analyzing language and context to show this is protected. But it wouldn’t matter, would it? If you are a minimally rational person, you don’t need to see the precedent, and if you’re a cultist, no amount of precedent matters to you.

                          Person. Woman. Man. Camera. TV.

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          • MikM Offline
                            MikM Offline
                            Mik
                            wrote last edited by
                            #96

                            I saw that. It’s beyond ridiculous. He’d better hope they don’t lose both houses in the midterms or he’s setting himself up for another impeachment.

                            "You cannot subsidize irresponsibility and expect people to become more responsible." — Thomas Sowell

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            • Andrea BA Offline
                              Andrea BA Offline
                              Andrea B
                              wrote last edited by
                              #97

                              1 Reply Last reply

                              Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.

                              Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.

                              With your input, this post could be even better 💗

                              Register Login
                              Reply
                              • Reply as topic
                              Log in to reply
                              • Oldest to Newest
                              • Newest to Oldest
                              • Most Votes


                              • Login

                              • Don't have an account? Register

                              • Login or register to search.
                              • First post
                                Last post
                              0
                              • Categories
                              • Recent
                              • Tags
                              • Popular
                              • Users
                              • Groups