I’m confused. Above is the indictment (Doc 1) with two counts. The real one everyone is talking about.
But…below, is a different indictment (Doc 3) with three counts (starts on page 2) - it includes the count that the grand jury declined. Huh. You can’t indictment someone if the grand jury doesn’t agree. Yes, Both signed by the DA. Both filed in Court. Why? I could understand having the draft ready if you assumed the grand jury would true bill all counts, but to actually sign and file it after the grand jury rejected that count. I’m pretty sure it’s amateur hour, but wondering if there is another plausible explanation.
Late:
No idea. I’m sure she’s a decent insurance lawyer.
There was some confusion in the courtroom and from Judge Lindsey Vaala, who appeared puzzled by the multiple charging documents filed for one case. Vaala asked why there were two documents in the same case. Halligan told her, “I did not see,” to which Vaala replied, “It has your signature on it.”
Vaala then had Halligan make handwritten changes to one of the documents and said both documents would be uploaded to the docket for the record.
It’s rare to see only the name of the U.S. attorney, in this case Halligan, on the docket and only her signature on the indictment. Usually there are several assistant U.S. attorneys listed, not just the U.S. attorney.
Halligan, a former insurance lawyer with no experience as a criminal prosecutor, was sworn in this week.
I don’t think her legal prowess is chief among her qualifications to serve in the Trump regime. Trump is pretty consistent in hiring and appointing people who are…not the best at understanding the law. He should really follow the Bob Loblaw Law Blog to get some decent legal advice instead of getting his legal counsel from highway rest stops and beauty pageants.
That may be the most amateurish document handed into federal court by a high government official ever. The three pages are labeled COUNT ONE, COUNT TWO, AND COUNT TWO.
COUNT ONE is the count that got left off the final document.
That’s the slippery count that got away, known in legal jargon as The Count of Monte Crisco.
If this case continues to fall apart, can they amend the indictment to claim that some other statement in Comey’s testimony that day was the false one – without going outside the statute of limitations?
Everything I’m reading says this indictment won’t fly. But that seems, to me, too good to be true.
I don’t know how long Comey’s senate testimony went on, but it is hard to talk for hours and never make one mistake. I believe this is why perjury is normally an add-on charge, not the only thing in the indictment.
P.S. There are two counts, but both amount to lying.
Lying to Congress? Does this involve recent Supreme Court nominees? Cabinet appointments? Testimony by the same cabinet members to Senate and House committees? It’s going to take years for these justices, former podcasters and Fox News talking heads to be impeached, indicted, and/or convicted. At least Bondi is on the case now
And those Epstein files? Could we get some action there?
Fair enough; the point is that authoritarian regimes still have trials, not to realize justice but to demonstrate that justice and the rule of law is not to be had by anyone opposing the regime.
The President has authority beyond the Office of the White House as they are in charge of all executive departments and independent agencies of the United States federal government; within that office, the White House Chief of Staff and the head of the White House Office of Staff Secretary are the #1 and #2 most powerful people within the staff of the Office of the White House because they control all official access to and daily agenda of the President, so unless you have a personal relationship with or are a billionaire donor/advisor to the President, you have to do through these gatekeepers. This is distinct from personal secretaries and aides (“body man”) who don’t have any kind of ostensible authority.
I’d love to see the agendas. Makeup, followed by personal time for watching Faux tell him what flatulence he emitted the previos day was a hit with
‘.the common clay of…’ cultists. Have all the glowing sound bites and fawning posts played or read to him by his private shadow. Diet Coke and Mickey Ds. Stephen Miller time for latest Nazi actions updates. More ranting at TV screens. Shitposting from the shitter.
I know I’m a few days late, but I think he had Anthony Weiner’s laptop under the desk. They looked inside, found some Clinton emails and ran to congress in confidence (hahaha!). It was immediately made public, what, a week before the election?, that there may be more to the Clinton email bullshit. Her popularity took a nosedive and she lost. A week after the election, Comey came back and said, haha, whoops, there’s nothing new there.
Is Lindsey Halligan going to be the lead prosecutor on this case? Obviously nobody wants the weight of the United States Department of Justice bearing down on them, but if it’s going to happen, then I can’t help but think Comey is in a pretty good position. I expect Halligan will attempt to delay going to trial for as long as she possibly can. She’s not a criminal lawyer, but she’s got to realize how weak her case really is. Maybe Comey should ask to go to trial ASAP.
I have seen some news reports that there may have been some second thoughts about that, once those same lawyers looked into the federal laws about offering free stuff to a government official to make the government official hold off on using the official’s powers against them. Something picayune about bribery offences.
I’d probably give odds on this making it past a motion to dismiss. Hard to imagine discovery going well for the prosecution. No, this isn’t going to be the end for Trump. But it sure is going to make even clearer his pettiness and vindictiveness. So crazy, as many of us feel Comey may have been more responsible for rump’s 1st term victory than any other single individual.
The same Comey that, as mentioned above, led to Trump in the first place? Those jurors are going to find him a sympathetic defendant after what he did to Hillary just because the leopard is eating his face now?
What “he did to Hillary” is old news. What Trump is doing to the country is top of the mind. I don’t like Comey all that much, and I agree he screwed up the 2016 election. Nevertheless, I’d love to be on the jury and help acquit him.
