- 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 11:44 am to SlowFlowPro
Posted on 4/27/24 at 11:44 am to SlowFlowPro
That's a very good point.
Perhaps the definition is closely aligned to what you say here
Perhaps it's any lawsuit or case against a party that relies upon fraudulent information AND has a party involved that would benefit from perpetrating the fraud on the court in order to punish a specific party.
I'm sure they could be cleaned up a bit but something along those lines where there's both motivation and fraudulent information.
Perhaps the definition is closely aligned to what you say here
quote:
clearly political-partisan based lawsuit thatrelied on fraudulent accusations
Perhaps it's any lawsuit or case against a party that relies upon fraudulent information AND has a party involved that would benefit from perpetrating the fraud on the court in order to punish a specific party.
I'm sure they could be cleaned up a bit but something along those lines where there's both motivation and fraudulent information.
3
Posted on 4/27/24 at 11:49 am to oklahogjr
quote:
Perhaps it's any lawsuit or case against a party that relies upon fraudulent information AND has a party involved that would benefit from perpetrating the fraud on the court in order to punish a specific party.
That's WAY more limited than they want, though. Why the legitimacy issue is so big. That would clearly not be a legitimate litigation. They have issues with litigations that are legitimate, per the written law (the illegitimacy they allege deals in whataboutism and layers and layers of conspiracy).
They would also reject this b/c then it would limit lawfare to the post-election lawsuits by Trump, et al.
Posted on 4/27/24 at 11:55 am to oklahogjr
quote:Negative.
Perhaps it's any lawsuit or case against a party that relies upon fraudulent information AND has a party involved that would benefit from perpetrating the fraud on the court in order to punish a specific party.
If "traditional Catholics" are arrested every time they trespass during protests because they oppose abortion, but proabortion Handmaids are never arrested for the same exact transgressions, that is lawfare. Even though the charges themselves are not fraud.
Posted on 4/27/24 at 12:04 pm to oklahogjr
quote:
Perhaps it's any lawsuit or case against a party that relies upon fraudulent information AND has a party involved that would benefit from perpetrating the fraud on the court in order to punish a specific party.
So like the Russia collusion witch hunts?
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News