Posted on 01/09/2024 4:47:03 AM PST by MtnClimber
Republicans need to up their game against the new Democratic tactic of lawfare.
Although the term “Lawfare” has origins going back to the 1950s, it remained relatively dormant and unknown until 1999 and 2001, where first Chinese military officers used the term in their book titled Unrestricted Warfare: China’s Master Plan to Destroy America. Two years later, the term was used in a paper by the highly respected, then-Air Force colonel (and later general) Charles Dunlap. In his several papers on the subject General Dunlap defined “Lawfare” as: “the strategy of using -- or misusing -- law as a substitute for traditional military means to achieve an operational objective.”
The first nationally infamous use of “lawfare” was most likely the battle in 2005 to remove Tom Delay (R Texas) from his position as Speaker of the House. The vendetta against Tom Delay was led by one Ronnie Earle, the DA in Austin, Texas who had a strong dislike for Delay (One might call it TDDS). Ultimately the case was overturned on appeal, but the battle was won, as Delay was removed from office. Recognize that one of the purposes of Lawfare is to remove the person from the political scene.
Republicans have been slow to react to this strategy, as they seem to have an unwarranted trust in the goodness of Democrats to be fair and reasonable people. One person who did see the importance of the Judicial system to be used by Democrats was then candidate Donald Trump in 2016. His bold move in establishing a list of eleven (after the election, expanded to 21) potential nominees to the Supreme Court stood as a major reason to vote for him for many people. The move not only increased his likelihood for success...
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
The left has corrupted almost everything. Look at the universities today. Where will fair judges come from?
The LEFT has RUINED EVERYTHING THEY TOUCH!!
...He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance....
But Deep State is making KG III and his parliament look like pikers.
People — quite rightly — worry about AI having biases and being programmed to lean in a particular direction.
BUT — if someone could make a reasonable stab at creating an AI that at least minimized (and perhaps declared) its biases, then I think an AI might be a replacement for a judge.
The humans really suck at the job.
Lawyers are akin to the Pharisees and Sadducees of New Testament times.
The Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), is the American Talmud.
Judges are the best candidates for bribery, with politicians next in line, IMHO.
Perfection will always elude us.
But the more I think of it, the more I like the idea of an open-source AI being used to scour existing legal documents, plus evidence and testimony, and then rendering a preliminary verdict of “X”, with a full report as to the logic of this recommendation.
Then a human judge (who we hope would be unbiased (!)) could review the verdict and either accept it, or state an argument as to why, based on the evidence, the AI has got it wrong, and state the actual verdict of “Y”, with a full report as to why the human judge feels correct in this judgment.
As part of the appeals process, a higher level court could then review the evidence, review the AI report, and review the official judge’s report. An appeals court could then re-assess.
But I think AIs will soon play an important role in these things. Humans will be a fail-safe, but logic processing would be beneficial.
The Roots of Criminality
Could start with Professional sports games and officiating calls. Fans claim they want more perfect calls but I think they really want more favorable calls for their side and overlooking of their teams’ transgressions. I have read credible opinions that there are actionable flaggable penalty offenses on every play in the NFL and NBA. I think the consistency of what percentage are “called” by the refs and what are ignored and the parity of this between teams in each match is the issue. Oh, and cheating is going on; lots of it I think.
Republicans routinely bring a sternly-worded letter to a knife fight.
Agreed—lawfare has been around as long as tyrants—probably goes back to ancient Babylon at least.
The words in bold are rather important in that sentence.
They aren’t necessary. Any trust of Dems is unwarranted.
"If it goes without saying, say it anyway, just to be sure."
If you say so :)
An interesting concept and one I hadn’t really considered before; primarily because AI can be biased with initial programming. However, if AI can be what some say it can be, then by it’s nature, it should be able to recognize its own bias and prevent it. But, that is a long, long way off.
Can implementing artificial intelligence cause a person to commit (a) sin?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.