Ah, the problem seems to be your chatbot level understanding of the relevant issues. The question of who the lawyers actually served as their client is an entirely legitimate question as to determine who ought to pay for their services. Lawyers that don't do their job for their actual clients don't get paid by said clients, suits regarding that are extremely common and normal, though like, say car crashes, the media typically wouldn't report on it unless they find it politically expedient.Well, perhaps I have misunderstood. In your earlier post, I took you saying:
in the context of the post you were replying to, was an argument that the lawyers did "deserve" to be screwed over, whilst I took the general phrasing and tone of your last post:
as suggesting you didn't approve of how hard "leftists" had "gone after" lawyers.
Since I'm confused though, for my own edification and clarity, what is your opinion on the validity of pushing for increased repercussions for lawyers who take on cases perceived as frivolous, politically motivated or vexatious?
Lawfare to harm lawyers that do actually do their jobs correctly for their actual clients because politics is an entirely separate issue. Which yes, the left regularly engages in, and retaliation in kind may be necessary to compel a truce. Other people have commented on that, I have not previously, and you confused the second with the first because of ignorance.