James Comey Indictment

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Comey is deliberately turning the case against him into a circus. Out of 1.3 million lawyers in the United States, he somehow ended up with the only two who are personally and deeply entangled in the conduct at issue, Michael Dreeben and Patrick Fitzgerald.

Dreeben has a huge conflict because he was on the Mueller special counsel team, which only existed because of the leaks at the center of this case. But Fitzgerald may be even worse. Some of the leaks ran through him. That makes him a witness, an active participant, and possibly even an unindicted co-conspirator.

By hiring lawyers who share exposure, Comey guarantees that everyone stays on script. None of them can break ranks without risking their own liability. It also complicates discovery because once defense lawyers are implicated in the scheme, it creates a huge labyrinth of privilege and related legal entanglements. That conveniently shields the full network from scrutiny while the process gets bogged down in procedural detours.

A serious judge would disqualify them immediately. But this is a partisan Biden judge, so he will likely let it continue and Comey will once again get away with gaming the system.

One little problem with that: Comey wasn’t indicted for leaking information or mishandling classified material. He was indicted for lying to Congress. Did these guys lie to Congress? Instruct him to lie to Congress? I don’t understand.

Have they even said what it is that they allege Comey lied about, and is there anything in the indictment that could prove he knowingly lied?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Comey is deliberately turning the case against him into a circus. Out of 1.3 million lawyers in the United States, he somehow ended up with the only two who are personally and deeply entangled in the conduct at issue, Michael Dreeben and Patrick Fitzgerald.

Dreeben has a huge conflict because he was on the Mueller special counsel team, which only existed because of the leaks at the center of this case. But Fitzgerald may be even worse. Some of the leaks ran through him. That makes him a witness, an active participant, and possibly even an unindicted co-conspirator.

By hiring lawyers who share exposure, Comey guarantees that everyone stays on script. None of them can break ranks without risking their own liability. It also complicates discovery because once defense lawyers are implicated in the scheme, it creates a huge labyrinth of privilege and related legal entanglements. That conveniently shields the full network from scrutiny while the process gets bogged down in procedural detours.

A serious judge would disqualify them immediately. But this is a partisan Biden judge, so he will likely let it continue and Comey will once again get away with gaming the system.

One little problem with that: Comey wasn’t indicted for leaking information or mishandling classified material. He was indicted for lying to Congress. Did these guys lie to Congress? Instruct him to lie to Congress? I don’t understand.

Have they even said what it is that they allege Comey lied about, and is there anything in the indictment that could prove he knowingly lied?

They claim he lied about not authorizing a guy named Daniel Richman to leak information to the press about the Clinton investigation. There are many problems with this, including that Richman has testified Comey never authorized him to do that, and the question Ted Cruz asked Comey wasn’t about Richman.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Comey is deliberately turning the case against him into a circus. Out of 1.3 million lawyers in the United States, he somehow ended up with the only two who are personally and deeply entangled in the conduct at issue, Michael Dreeben and Patrick Fitzgerald.

Dreeben has a huge conflict because he was on the Mueller special counsel team, which only existed because of the leaks at the center of this case. But Fitzgerald may be even worse. Some of the leaks ran through him. That makes him a witness, an active participant, and possibly even an unindicted co-conspirator.

By hiring lawyers who share exposure, Comey guarantees that everyone stays on script. None of them can break ranks without risking their own liability. It also complicates discovery because once defense lawyers are implicated in the scheme, it creates a huge labyrinth of privilege and related legal entanglements. That conveniently shields the full network from scrutiny while the process gets bogged down in procedural detours.

A serious judge would disqualify them immediately. But this is a partisan Biden judge, so he will likely let it continue and Comey will once again get away with gaming the system.

One little problem with that: Comey wasn’t indicted for leaking information or mishandling classified material. He was indicted for lying to Congress. Did these guys lie to Congress? Instruct him to lie to Congress? I don’t understand.

Have they even said what it is that they allege Comey lied about, and is there anything in the indictment that could prove he knowingly lied?

They claim he lied about not authorizing a guy named Daniel Richman to leak information to the press about the Clinton investigation. There are many problems with this, including that Richman has testified Comey never authorized him to do that, and the question Ted Cruz asked Comey wasn’t about Richman.

Yes, there's no way this indictment will go anywhere.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Comey is deliberately turning the case against him into a circus. Out of 1.3 million lawyers in the United States, he somehow ended up with the only two who are personally and deeply entangled in the conduct at issue, Michael Dreeben and Patrick Fitzgerald.

Dreeben has a huge conflict because he was on the Mueller special counsel team, which only existed because of the leaks at the center of this case. But Fitzgerald may be even worse. Some of the leaks ran through him. That makes him a witness, an active participant, and possibly even an unindicted co-conspirator.

By hiring lawyers who share exposure, Comey guarantees that everyone stays on script. None of them can break ranks without risking their own liability. It also complicates discovery because once defense lawyers are implicated in the scheme, it creates a huge labyrinth of privilege and related legal entanglements. That conveniently shields the full network from scrutiny while the process gets bogged down in procedural detours.

A serious judge would disqualify them immediately. But this is a partisan Biden judge, so he will likely let it continue and Comey will once again get away with gaming the system.

One little problem with that: Comey wasn’t indicted for leaking information or mishandling classified material. He was indicted for lying to Congress. Did these guys lie to Congress? Instruct him to lie to Congress? I don’t understand.

Have they even said what it is that they allege Comey lied about, and is there anything in the indictment that could prove he knowingly lied?

They claim he lied about not authorizing a guy named Daniel Richman to leak information to the press about the Clinton investigation. There are many problems with this, including that Richman has testified Comey never authorized him to do that, and the question Ted Cruz asked Comey wasn’t about Richman.

Yes, there's no way this indictment will go anywhere.

It will likely be dismissed before trial, but I would love to see Halligan humiliated at a jury trial.

[Anonymous]

Remember that many Federal judges have caught Trump and his administration members lying under oath in Federal Court..

Europe must enact regime change in USA. They will be welcomed as liberators!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Remember that many Federal judges have caught Trump and his administration members lying under oath in Federal Court..

Europe must enact regime change in USA. They will be welcomed as liberators!

No one is coming to save us. That's up to us.

[Anonymous]

Lindsay used attorney client privileged information when presenting the Comey case to the GJ. Whoops!

[Anonymous]

Attorney General Pam Bondi says she has retroactively appointed former Trump attorney Lindsey Halligan as a "special attorney" for DOJ and has "ratified" all of her actions to date, including her presentations to the grand juries that indicted Trump's foes.

https://bsky.app/profile/bradheath.bsky.social/post/3m4qxl6zpw22v

If course, this isn't how our legal system works, but a gold star to Pam for trying?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Comey is deliberately turning the case against him into a circus. Out of 1.3 million lawyers in the United States, he somehow ended up with the only two who are personally and deeply entangled in the conduct at issue, Michael Dreeben and Patrick Fitzgerald.

Dreeben has a huge conflict because he was on the Mueller special counsel team, which only existed because of the leaks at the center of this case. But Fitzgerald may be even worse. Some of the leaks ran through him. That makes him a witness, an active participant, and possibly even an unindicted co-conspirator.

By hiring lawyers who share exposure, Comey guarantees that everyone stays on script. None of them can break ranks without risking their own liability. It also complicates discovery because once defense lawyers are implicated in the scheme, it creates a huge labyrinth of privilege and related legal entanglements. That conveniently shields the full network from scrutiny while the process gets bogged down in procedural detours.

A serious judge would disqualify them immediately. But this is a partisan Biden judge, so he will likely let it continue and Comey will once again get away with gaming the system.

One little problem with that: Comey wasn’t indicted for leaking information or mishandling classified material. He was indicted for lying to Congress. Did these guys lie to Congress? Instruct him to lie to Congress? I don’t understand.

Have they even said what it is that they allege Comey lied about, and is there anything in the indictment that could prove he knowingly lied?

They claim he lied about not authorizing a guy named Daniel Richman to leak information to the press about the Clinton investigation. There are many problems with this, including that Richman has testified Comey never authorized him to do that, and the question Ted Cruz asked Comey wasn’t about Richman.

The argument dismissing a lot of the Mueller crimes was that they weren't real crimes, they were crimes about not telling the truth to the FBI, right? Process crimes or something?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Attorney General Pam Bondi says she has retroactively appointed former Trump attorney Lindsey Halligan as a "special attorney" for DOJ and has "ratified" all of her actions to date, including her presentations to the grand juries that indicted Trump's foes.

https://bsky.app/profile/bradheath.bsky.social/post/3m4qxl6zpw22v

If course, this isn't how our legal system works, but a gold star to Pam for trying?

What does this even mean?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Attorney General Pam Bondi says she has retroactively appointed former Trump attorney Lindsey Halligan as a "special attorney" for DOJ and has "ratified" all of her actions to date, including her presentations to the grand juries that indicted Trump's foes.

https://bsky.app/profile/bradheath.bsky.social/post/3m4qxl6zpw22v

If course, this isn't how our legal system works, but a gold star to Pam for trying?

What does this even mean?

Eva Blondi is trying to undermine the very strong argument Comey’s counsel has made that Hooligan’s appointment violates the regulations concerning interim US Attorney appointments and thus renders the indictments she and she alone signed into effect moot. In Comey’s case this would end the case against him because the statute of limitations has run out - it ran out the day after Hooligan indicted him.

I don’t think there is any validity to recategorizing Hooligan’s appointment retroactively, but yes, nice try on the Nazi AG’s part.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Attorney General Pam Bondi says she has retroactively appointed former Trump attorney Lindsey Halligan as a "special attorney" for DOJ and has "ratified" all of her actions to date, including her presentations to the grand juries that indicted Trump's foes.

https://bsky.app/profile/bradheath.bsky.social/post/3m4qxl6zpw22v

If course, this isn't how our legal system works, but a gold star to Pam for trying?

What does this even mean?

It means that she is going for the "Halligan Mulliga" . . . Legal Time Travel is an awesome strategy!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Attorney General Pam Bondi says she has retroactively appointed former Trump attorney Lindsey Halligan as a "special attorney" for DOJ and has "ratified" all of her actions to date, including her presentations to the grand juries that indicted Trump's foes.

https://bsky.app/profile/bradheath.bsky.social/post/3m4qxl6zpw22v

If course, this isn't how our legal system works, but a gold star to Pam for trying?

What does this even mean?

It means the case against him was brought by someone who did not have the legal authority to do so. Bondi is trying to make up a new voodoo time travel law that doesn't exist to try to pretend the giant, huge, malpractice mistake didn't happen or doesn't really matter.

[Anonymous]

Oh no!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Oh no!

Irrelevnat to the indictment and, given they are notes, not very relevant to anything.

OH NOOOOOOO!