3 ms·
The document you linked shows that the case is Government Entity vs Private Entity. Anything improper that the government's attorneys do would be an abuse of po
by OnlyOneCannolo 7y ago
The document you linked shows that the case is Government Entity vs Private Entity. Anything improper that the government's attorneys do would be an abuse of power.
- JumpCrisscross 7y ago> * Anything improper that the government's attorneys do would be an abuse of power* If the government lawyers said "he is behaving like a terorrist" or "this is terrorism," I'd agree with you. But we don't know that. We just have government lawyers describing something, within unknown context, as a "strategy of terrorism" and a headline running that into an accusation.
- OnlyOneCannolo 7y agoI'm challenging the use of the phrase "faux pas" to describe actions of government representatives that could harm private entities. Whether and how it happened is irrelevant.
- JumpCrisscross 7y ago> I'm challenging the use of the phrase "faux pas" to describe actions of government representatives that could harm private entities It's a fair challenge. My response isn't that you're wrong, just that the article provides insufficient evidence for me to agree with you. Describing a legal action as a "strategy of terrorism" is, to me, a faux pas. Describing a person's activities as a "strategy of terrorism" is abusive if employed to dissuade them from continuing a legal battle and possibly defamatory.
- OnlyOneCannolo 7y agoGotcha. I thought you were dismissing the possibility that it could be anything more serious than a "faux pas" if it was in fact improper.