Let’s see if it pays off for them.
It’s a bold strategy, Cotton.
i was going to post about ms halligan’s remarks yest., but reckoned it was worth it. just a whinging about “he was mean to me”, “waaahhhaahhh”.
unlike ms halligan’s indictment, there is a transcript of what was said in court on weds.. proof of what was said by whom to whom. unlike the indictment where there is no proof of what was said and done.
Look, the proof will come soon enough! They just need to finish typing it!
Halligan must be getting tips on how to handle judges from an expert. Alina Habba I’m guessing. Whining about the judge is a sure strategy.
Attorneys whining about judges being unfair or mean is not at all unusual. (And I believe that some attorneys try to provoke the decision-maker into uttering an intemperate remark.) Sometimes a reviewing body might accept such accusations. Other times, the lawyer is performing for their client. “It wasn’t MY fault!”
“You’re being mean to me for holding me accountable for my words and actions” is kind of the MAGA brand.
You’re not suggesting someone in the prosecution team is trying to sabotage their case…?
They have packets.
How will this perjury case be dismissed:
- Halligan - I’m just an insurance lawyer!
- Trump - I am vindictive incarnate!
- Comey - I literally told the truth!
- All the above
I’ll go with 1 and hope for 2.
Of course, in that movie Marlene Dietrich is playing Charles Laughton in an elaborate scam to deceive the court, in which she succeeds.
I don’t think Ms Halligan is up to Marlene Dietrich’s cunning, but I suppose I could be misjudging her. 
Mostly I was thinking of the two most prominent lines from the scene: “Or are you not in fact a chronic and habitual liar!” and “I am surprised the testament did not leap from her hand when she was sworn here today.”
It turns out Halligan’s appointment is invalid, at least according to Judge Currie who dismissed the case against Comey without prejudice.
Was that the only case she was in charge of?
no.comey and james.
Judge dismisses DOJ charges against James Comey and Letitia James
“I conclude that all actions flowing from Ms. Halligan’s defective appointment, including securing and signing Mr. Comey’s indictment, constitute unlawful exercises of executive power and must be set aside,” Currie wrote in Comey’s case.
In a separate opinion in James’ case, Currie used almost identical language to dismiss the charges against the New York attorney general.
The indictments were dismissed in a way that permits the Justice Department to attempt to secure new charges. However, it’s unclear what the department can or will do. In Comey’s case, his lawyers have already argued that the legal deadline for bringing charges against him lapsed in between when his initial indictment was secured and the present day.
I hope Trump’s blood is boiling.
Really shouldn’t be so significant the relatively infrequent times these days that justice is served.
Later Halligan.
AG Bondi unlawfully appointed Halligan as interim US Attorney for EDVA. Comey says there was already an interim US attorney so now it should have been the Judges that did the appointment. Trial Court agreed. I’m sure this will be appealed as it’s not entirely clear if AG or Judges do the appointment in this situation.
This all could have been avoided had Bondi made Halligan a special prosecutor. But it’s dumb in charge of dumb at the DOJ.
This all could have also been avoided if they just didn’t go out of their way to file bogus charges to appease Trump.
Is it really so surprising that corruption breeds incompetence and that incompetence does not get the desired results?
My prediction is that you will see this more and more often. See you in the Schadenfreude thread!