Reply to James Comey Indictment

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "James Comey Indictment"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I cannot comprehend why these people would risk everything to lie for trump.[/quote]

Different people likely have different reasons, but in Lindsay’s case I think it’s safe to say she’s just dumb as a rock[/quote]

This is a case of stupidity, not malice. She gained absolutely nothing from not presenting the 2 count draft indictment to the GJ. [/quote]

She gained a (purported) indictment.  If she did it the right way, they might have voted no on the two count or she might have run out of time.  We don't really know the full story of what exactly they did and didn't vote for.  We're just getting bits and pieces, most of them filtered through Lindsay herself.[/quote]

I disagree. The grand jury had already taken a [b]preliminary[/b] vote in which it voted to indict on counts two and three.  [/quote]

Preliminary.

Until they took a final vote, they could change their minds.  Moreover, maybe some thought they no billed one count but not another and vice versa.  That is why the details are important.[/quote]

I'm the AUSA poster above. That's not really how it works. It is called a preliminary vote, but they don't actually vote again. I've indicted a few dozen cases and I've never seen a preliminary vote turn turn into a no bill. Again, I'm not defending her. I just don't think we should give her any more credit than she's entitled. [/quote]

Again, we don't really know much about what they voted on.  Lindsay and the foreperson walked into the court with a three count indictment that said the GJ had voted to no-bill the entire thing.  They also had a two count indictment that said they voted indict on those two counts.  The judge was confused because those documents were in conflict.  She questioned the foreperson on it and the testimony is very garbled and confusing.  The judge eventually concluded that the GJ voted for the second two counts and against the first one, and then voted for the two count.  But the judge obviously got that wrong because we've now learned no vote ever happened on the two count.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics