This is what lawfare looks like.

[Papageorgio]

I didn’t say that. Act like an adult.

Federal prosecutors charged a guy throwing a large firecracker at the building with arson. That’s how far they took things.

8.7% charged were prosecuted. Act like an adult.

 

[Marener]

8.7% charged were prosecuted. Act like an adult.

And? You act as though a percentage carries some empiric value.

It doesn’t.

Police can arrest and charge anyone they want for basically any reason they want. The prosecutors are the ones who actually have to use facts.

 

[Papageorgio]

And? You act as though a percentage carries some empiric value.

It doesn’t.

Police can arrest and charge anyone they want for basically any reason they want. The prosecutors are the ones who actually have to use facts.

It does, you just don’t like it.

 

[j-mac]

I did. You’re a liar. Or delusional.

I never expected you to be honest

 

[j-mac]

Ok, that's what I expected. I also expected that you couldn't give me examples of the precedents you referred to.

No, you’re just trying to run me around, I won’t have it.

 

[kyzr]

No, you’re just trying to run me around, I won’t have it.

That's all they do. Ignore the ones who don't debate honestly, much less clutter.

 

[Marener]

I never expected you to be honest

You’re not even honest to yourself.

 

[Marener]

It does, you just don’t like it.

It doesn’t. It totally depends on the character of the arrests being made.

During these protests and riots, the cops would just round up and arrest people to get them off the street. It didn’t matter to them that they had no evidence sufficient to maintain a prosecution. It’s just about control.

 

[Papageorgio]

It doesn’t. It totally depends on the character of the arrests being made.

During these protests and riots, the cops would just round up and arrest people to get them off the street. It didn’t matter to them that they had no evidence sufficient to maintain a prosecution. It’s just about control.

That isn’t true, people were arrested for steeling, looting, assaulting, unrest, disturbing the peace and again, the prosecutor said they did have enough prosecutors so they let them go. So contrary to your opinion, facts suggest otherwise.

 

[Marener]

That isn’t true, people were arrested for steeling, looting, assaulting, unrest, disturbing the peace and again, the prosecutor said they did have enough prosecutors so they let them go. So contrary to your opinion, facts suggest otherwise.

Some were, but the vast majority of people weren’t.

Prosecutors went with cases that had evidence to prove property damage and violence.

Not sure what “unrest” is and “disturbing the peace” is a garbage term that cops routinely use to justify suppressing first amendment rights.

 

[Papageorgio]

Some were, but the vast majority of people weren’t.

Prosecutors went with cases that had evidence to prove property damage and violence.

Not sure what “unrest” is and “disturbing the peace” is a garbage term that cops routinely use to justify suppressing first amendment rights.

I know it’s the cops fault, people out in the streets rioting and the cops should just let it go.

 

[Marener]

I know it’s the cops fault, people out in the streets rioting and the cops should just let it go.

Cops shouldn’t arrest innocent people who are protesting.

You are being dishonest and not engaging with the point I’m making.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Cops shouldn’t arrest innocent people who are protesting.

You are being dishonest and not engaging with the point I’m making.

the riots against ICE are not innocent people just protesting. They have attacked vehicles buildings and people.

 

[Papageorgio]

Cops shouldn’t arrest innocent people who are protesting.

You are being dishonest and not engaging with the point I’m making.

So looting, arson, assault is no longer a riot, it’s protesting? You are the one being dishonest, by dismissing riots as protests.

 

[Marener]

the riots against ICE are not innocent people just protesting. They have attacked vehicles buildings and people.

A few have done so, but DHS is capable of handling a few violent protestors.

 

[PeanutGallery]

So looting, arson, assault is no longer a riot, it’s protesting? You are the one being dishonest, by dismissing riots as protests.

If we're going to hold that standard, then the liberals can stop calling J6 an insurrection. It's now been downgraded to just a protest.

 

[SweetTea]

And Republicans remain an ongoing threat to democracy.

So says a member of the party that is getting ready to elect a professed Socialist in NYC. Yeah, you can't make this stuff up.

 

[berg80]

Speaking of lawfare (which is the subject of the thread, remember?).

Prosecutors may move to oust James Comey’s defense lawyer​

“Based on publicly disclosed information, the defendant used current lead defense counsel to improperly disclose classified information,” prosecutors Tyler Lemons and Gabriel Diaz wrote. “This fact raises a question of conflict and disqualification for current lead defense counsel.”

Fitzgerald fired back at prosecutors Monday morning, accusing them of attempting to “defame” him with demonstrably false allegations.

“There was no ‘leaking’ of classified information to the press by either Mr. Comey or his counsel. Full stop,” Fitzgerald and other defense attorneys wrote.

The prosecution’s filing is short on details, but references a Justice Department Office of Inspector General report from 2019 that found Fitzgerald had a role in Comey’s effort to get information to the media about what he viewed as improper efforts by Trump to get him to pledge loyalty in the days before his firing.

About a month after Comey was fired, he acknowledged during Senate testimony that he asked another lawyer and friend, Columbia law professor Daniel Richman, to give versions of memos he had written about his conversations with Trump to The New York Times in a bid to make sure a special counsel was named to investigate Trump’s conduct.

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/10/19/james-comey-lawyer-criminal-case-00615102

JAMES COMEY’S REPONSE TO GOVERNMENT’S MOTION FOR EXPEDITED RULING

James B. Comey, Jr., by counsel, respectfully requests that the Court deny the government’s request for an expedited decision (ECF No. 54) on the government’s Motion for Implementation of Filter Protocol (ECF No. 38).Without any prior notice to the defense, the government filed the instant motion, ECF No. 54. The defense needs the two weeks afforded by Local Rule 12,until October 27, 2025, to review the relevant warrants and materials at issue in the discovery and respond to the government’s motion, particularly in light of the substantive motion schedule. This is important because based on the defense’s review to date, it appears that the government’s continued review of the materials is unlawful. Finally, the government’s effort to defame lead defense counsel provides no basis to grant the motion. The Court should deny the government’s motion for an expedited decision.

https://www.politico.com/f/?id=0000019a-0240-d83c-a3fa-67770a740000

 

[Papageorgio]

Speaking of lawfare (which is the subject of the thread, remember?).

Prosecutors may move to oust James Comey’s defense lawyer​

“Based on publicly disclosed information, the defendant used current lead defense counsel to improperly disclose classified information,” prosecutors Tyler Lemons and Gabriel Diaz wrote. “This fact raises a question of conflict and disqualification for current lead defense counsel.”

Fitzgerald fired back at prosecutors Monday morning, accusing them of attempting to “defame” him with demonstrably false allegations.

“There was no ‘leaking’ of classified information to the press by either Mr. Comey or his counsel. Full stop,” Fitzgerald and other defense attorneys wrote.

The prosecution’s filing is short on details, but references a Justice Department Office of Inspector General report from 2019 that found Fitzgerald had a role in Comey’s effort to get information to the media about what he viewed as improper efforts by Trump to get him to pledge loyalty in the days before his firing.

About a month after Comey was fired, he acknowledged during Senate testimony that he asked another lawyer and friend, Columbia law professor Daniel Richman, to give versions of memos he had written about his conversations with Trump to The New York Times in a bid to make sure a special counsel was named to investigate Trump’s conduct.

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/10/19/james-comey-lawyer-criminal-case-00615102

JAMES COMEY’S REPONSE TO GOVERNMENT’SMOTION FOR EXPEDITED RULING

James B. Comey, Jr., by counsel, respectfully requests that the Court deny the government’s request for an expedited decision (ECF No. 54) on the government’s Motion for Implementation of Filter Protocol (ECF No. 38).Without any prior notice to the defense, the government filed the instant motion, ECF No. 54. The defense needs the two weeks afforded by Local Rule 12,until October 27, 2025, to review the relevant warrants and materials at issue in the discovery and respond to the government’s motion, particularly in light of the substantive motion schedule. This is important because based on the defense’s review to date, it appears that the government’s continued review of the materials is unlawful. Finally, the government’s effort to defame lead defense counsel provides no basis to grant the motion. The Court should deny the government’s motion for an expedited decision.

https://www.politico.com/f/?id=0000019a-0240-d83c-a3fa-67770a740000

So Comey is playing games.

 

[berg80]

So Comey is playing games.

Well, that's the opposite of what's happening but your failure to comprehend the situation does not surprise me.