Absolutely — you (and the judge!) covered a lot of the details about the original warrant, the attorney-client privilege question, and the implications as to burden to “prove” innocence and “additional, better” evidence. It’s actually shocking. “Best people” indeed!
I am reading "The Divider" by Peter Baker ansmd Susan Glasser. According to their reporting, in 2016 Trump had no interest in actually governing. He just wanted ro win. And here we are...
I think Trump sincerely believed that academics were overcomplicating everything, and that simple common-sense ideas would make the government vastly more successful. Obviously, he and those who believed him were wrong.
I never suggested that Trump was intellectually curious. Rather he has an exaggerated trust in his own capacities. He regards himself as an all-purpose purveyor of common sense who can solve everything with a platitude or two.
Thanks Joyce for working so hard to keep us informed about Trump's efforts to turn our justice system into his own weapon of retribution. It must have been very late for you to get this out tonight.
So the battle is joined, in which judges faithful to their oaths and to the Constitution push back against the corrupt Trump administration and their efforts to turn justice on its head and use their power to persecute their political opponents. Thanks to Judges Fitzpatrick and Nachmanoff for applying the law without fear or favor. If there is a silver lining it is that the incompetence of Trump and his flying monkeys is being exposed and rejected by courts across the country and that their corruption is made clear to Americans who do not want to live in a dictatorship.
This is by far the most lucid explanation of the travesty of Justice that the DOJ has let loose on President Trump's political targets. What is most astounding is the idea that the Trump "prosecutor" responded to a question from a Grand Juror and asserted that the burden of proof in this criminal case would shift to the Defendant. If that is really was she said this is not a question of lack of experience. She either deliberately misstated the Law OR she is so incompetent that she should be disbarred on that ground alone. I hope that when Joyce has a chance ( and the further pleadings have been submitted to Judge Nachmanoff) she will shed further light on this aspect of the Travesty. Having practiced law for over 50 years, I find it hard to believe that there is ANY lawyer who thinks that there is ever a circumstance when a Defendant has to prove his innocence.
I've wondered where Bar Associations are with all of that. I've been told that they are timid about accusing members of misconduct. Maybe that's true. With all that lawyers have done to protect DJT, I'm sad that the Association's don't take a role to provide foundational support for their field. Maybe it's happening and just not being reported?
Yes, often true! I suppose it's silly to suggest that Bar Associations highlight corruption among its members. Better to absorb all if it and hope for the best, I guess.
Unless the person studied only Napoleonic law, where that is true. Hahaha. Even a lax person knows that in the US you are innocent unless proven guilty.
Unless the person studied only Napoleonic law, where that is true. Hahaha. Even a lay person knows that in the US you are innocent unless proven guilty.
Did she think nobody would find out what she told the grand jury? Did she think that because she had been “chosen” that she could just tell them whatever she wanted and himself would make it all go away??
Yes the case must be dismissed and discussed. It is a reminder of so many basic principles of our system. For example fairness and honesty in the process. I was on a grand jury and I learned the details of general principles that I had not thought of. One was to protect a person (accused or witness) from publicity until the there was probable cause that their was a crime done. Also to protect them from poor evidence etc. It is a complicated system to protect all of us. We need to be reminded of it in situations like this one.
She wouldn't have been hired if she hadn't been willing to lie and cheat. Trump demands loyalty, no integrity, and shamelessness. Plus he demands hair extensions, Botox, and big breasts for women.
Definitely not too nasty, Debbie, especially when it is the truth. The only bimbo that doesn’t seem to fit the bill is susie wiles. I am not sure where she fits in given that she doesn’t have that kind of required look about her. Oh, and these flying monkeys do not have the privilege of having their names capitalized.
See Rick Wilson’s “Run, Susie, Run” post for a complete picture of who Susie Wiles is. Fantastic, but disturbing, read. Worse than a Barbie because she comes from the “knowledgeable” side of the Republican Party and is doing this anyway.
The NYT published an very good article by Emiky Bazelon about the destruction of DOJ by Trump during his first nine months in office. In thr articlr Bazelon reported that Eric Siebert, thr U.S. Atty for the ED, Va., had boasted abiut his links to Trump attorneys. Siebert was fired after his review of the Comey case found no grounds for indictment.
Competent, ethical attorneys are not risking their reputations to join Trump's witch hunts; this we get Halligan , who might know real estate or insurance law but who has no experience in criminal law. Halligan knows one thing: Donald Trump wants Comey's scalp.
Dismissal is fine because the statute of limitations has run, so can’t be refiled. Also, can do dismissal with prejudice which means, even if the SOL hadn’t run, they couldn’t file again.
True, but that just runs up Comey’s legal fees and prolongs the time he and his family have to spend going through the process. Too bad his daughter can’t just tell us what we want to know!
Thank you, Joyce. If they can get away with bending the rules and evidence to suit the president in order to convict Comey and others, any of us could be next. If Trump is allowed to continue, he could be Putin and we could be Navalny. We can't allow it.
Whoah. “Rest assured the government has more evidence and perhaps better evidence to use at trial”?? So hand down an indictment now, because even if you didn’t see or hear it, I’m telling you that we have better evidence…I know next to nothing about how a grand jury works, but my sense of fairness tells me that this is just off the rails wrong.
And how did it happen that the indictment that was returned does not seem to be the one signed by the grand jury? Did the pretendsecutor use that old word processing trick, where she attached the signature page to a different document from whence it came? Or something similar? If so, she must be charged with criminal conduct.
Thank you for your continuing education, Joyce Vance. If you have some extra time, would you please become licensed in Georgia and take over the hanging prosecution there that begs for an experienced hand? We will feed your chickens…
“Rest assured the government has more evidence and perhaps better evidence to use at trial”: page 5 out of the Trump-brand playbook. Bait the hook and see how many bite.
It is very bothersome that governmental misconduct has become not just the rule … but “accepted” behavior. Likewise sexual abuse, business fraud, dishonesty, civility.
From this incredibly foul administration such behavior has become "expected" by most Americans. It is unfortunate that it is also "accepted" by a large number of those Americans.
Absolutely, James. We see more and more of foul behavior every day. Not so much here in Maine. There are so few of us, and we're so old, we can't afford to piss off our neighbors. And, it is really Cold.
I'm an ancient (80) native of the deep South, but I chose the Northwoods and the hardy, plainspoken people over Florida. Would get Island fever on an island, no matter how lovely. A visit there would be lovely!!
Here's where my chin hit my keyboard and my eyes bugged out so far they stuck to my screen, as i read and re-read it: "If this procedure [presentation of the second indictment to the grand jury, legal directions to them, and their deliberation upon it] did not take place [because there is no record of it in the transcript or audio recording], then the court is in uncharted legal territory in that the indictment returned in open court was not the same charging document presented to and deliberated upon by the grand jury." [brackets are mine]
Dog Bless America! How could Halligan think this childish chicanery would not be discovered?
And then the court's even-mannered summation that "...this unusual series of events calls into question the presumption of regularity generally associated with grand jury proceedings and provides another genuine issue the defense may raise to challenge the manner in which the government obtained the indictment." (Ya think??!! I want to call her every four-letter name i can think of and then invent some more, but how effective and literate this writing is!)
On one hand, the attempted cheating is "holy sh*t!" On the other, the court's insight into it, and response to it, is "BEAUTIFUL!"
Halligan sounds like a used car salesman, or one of those awful late-night ads for knives or garden hoses. To the Grand Jury “Hey if this isn’t enough for you, I’ve got this and this and this and wait - there’s more!” Except it isn’t funny because any one of us could be sitting there at the mercy of a vindictive Trump prosecution. So in all seriousness, thank you for taking the time to explain exactly what is going on in such a clear, concise and understandable manner.
Wonder if she will be able to get even the real estate business now. Would you hire her? Look at the long list of people who have been tainted by association with tRump. He can Parden all of them, but They will never work in this town again, said a movie mogul.
So true. Their reputations have been destroyed. It’s amazing so many people are so mesmerized by this grifting con artist - they can’t and/or won’t look at the literally hundreds of lives he’s destroyed and think “Hmmm maybe I should stay away from this creep.” Of course, 70 + million people thought he’d make their lives better too…I don’t see that working out too well for them, no matter how much they profess their love for him.
Looking at your comment again, I was reminded of the old George M. Cohan song "Harrigan". But "Harrigan" seen in the twisted funhouse mirror becomes "Halligan." So we get the paraphrased lyrics.
"H-A-double L-I G-A-N you see,
It's a name that much shame quickly has been connected with;
Apparently, this is just business as usual for lazy, sloppy, trumpist DOJ prosecutors. I am heartened by the fact that we still have judges who are holding fast to our Constitutional rule of law. They need our support.
So thankful the obvious has come out. It turns out there are consequences to appointing a beauty queen at the last minute to handle a political prosecution without merit. Who knew?
Thank you, Joyce, for helping to dot the i's, cross the t's, and expose the fraud and absurdity for exactly what it is.
I would like to know the significance of Bondi’s purported ratification of the grand jury proceedings. It seems to me she is besmirched in a big way. Is such ratification signed under penalty of perjury?
Any legal filing signed by an attorney is an attestation that the information contained is true and correct. It would be potential grounds for disbarment to willfully mislead a court. Also a basis for contempt proceedings (which are occuring now in an unrelated case in front of Judge Boasberg). The DOJʻs reputation is completely gone now and courts are not giving the government the presumption of regularity now. Thank goodness for experienced jurists who are not intimidated by the Trump regime.
Thank you for the concise explanation. To a lay person like me, it sounds like Director Comey should be able to be set free. The question is, who is going to be responsible for his legal fees😡😡😡
What’s happened to the DOJ is very sad. So many prosecuting authorities in the USA are terribly compromised by incompetence or corruption, yet the Feds have historically carried the torch for the rule of law as properly understood.
That deserved reputation was hard earned. It may take years to restore after the work of these shit-flinging monkeys is done.
The Trump stench will linger far after he is gone (may it be soon). Let it begin with the loss of professional licenses by those who willingly engaged in illegal acts to please their master.
At Nuremberg, German jurists who had served the Nazi regime stood accused of “judicial murder and other atrocities, which they committed by destroying law and justice in Germany and then utilizing the emptied forms of legal process for the persecution, enslavement, and extermination on a large scale.”
From 1946 through 1949, under the aegis of the International Military Tribunal, American occupying authorities carried out a series of 12 subsequent trials in Nuremberg against surviving members of the military, political, economic, medical, and juridical leadership cadres of Nazi Germany.
In the case of the US v. Josef Altstötter, et al., an American military tribunal tried members of the Reich Ministry of Justice as well as jurists and prosecutors of the People's Court [Volksgericht] and Special Court [Sondergericht].
"Out of the ten Nazi judges who were found guilty all but one were released by 1957."
Your point?
More than the individuals involved was the exercise and the precedent. The point of emphasizing the significance of an independent judiciary.
There is a reason Charles Koch bagman Leonard Leo focused on court capture in the drive to hollow out the foundations of the American democratic republic - equality before the law, equal representation, and separation of church and state. They needed to overturn the Constitution to drain US law of justice in order to legitimize their ChristoFascist kleptocracy. They pounced on the judiciary as the branch least accessible and least answerable to the people.
My point is that it's not a great example because the United States was even by then more concerned with the threat of Soviet communism than with punishing prominent nazis. many were allowed to escape, and some even ended up in the US.
I would also point out that Trump has attacked Leo for his judicial appointments recommendations, some of whom have refused to go along with Trump's lawless behaviour
If the plan was to subvert the judiciary then it doesn't seem to be working since when the courts have reached decisions on the merits of a case they have almost always ruled against the administration - the single exception being the Supreme Court with its inbuilt conservative majority.
"If the plan was to subvert the judiciary then it doesn't seem to be working since when the courts have reached decisions on the merits of a case they have almost always ruled against the administration - the single exception being the Supreme Court with its inbuilt conservative majority."
Missing the forest for some trees much? Is it possible that you are not aware of how the Federalist Society - under and through Leo - has remade the American judiciary? For the worse. Throwing up some recent decisions (not all by Leo picks) and Trump's hissy fit is not really an argument against Leo's efficacy.
HaHa. The Supreme Court. A significant single exception, no? The right wing religious extremist majority with a bent for privileging the white and wealthy. And for abusing the Shadow Docket. Inbuilt? Seriously? Hand picked by Leonard Leo. Who also funds a wide range of antidemocratic and anti constitutional amicus briefs before his hand crafted Supreme Court majority.
Ahmmm, Ken. They did not even carry a match in the Civil Rights battles in the South when I was a part of that. And as was often said on the old Saturday Night Live....And That's the Truth!!
Thanks, Debbie. I did not mean to imply that the DOJ has always prosecuted where it should.
As Joyce has indicated, an honourable prosecutor (or, for that matter any honourable advocate) lives with a consciousness of his or her responsibility for integrity of the legal process. Doing your homework so that you actually know your brief, not mis-stating facts or law, not hiding witnesses or evidence, candour with the court; these sorts of things matter not only to the particular case but to society's broader acceptance of courts' decisions.
Worth every single word. You are a treasure Joyce Vance. Thank you!
Absolutely — you (and the judge!) covered a lot of the details about the original warrant, the attorney-client privilege question, and the implications as to burden to “prove” innocence and “additional, better” evidence. It’s actually shocking. “Best people” indeed!
Reminds me of when Trump said in 2017: “Nobody knew health care could be so complicated.”
Seems that the same is true of criminal procedure! It's way beyond Trump and his real estate lawyer.
I am reading "The Divider" by Peter Baker ansmd Susan Glasser. According to their reporting, in 2016 Trump had no interest in actually governing. He just wanted ro win. And here we are...
I think Trump sincerely believed that academics were overcomplicating everything, and that simple common-sense ideas would make the government vastly more successful. Obviously, he and those who believed him were wrong.
That's a very kind assessment of Trump. There may be some truth to it, as Trump is not known for intellectual curiosity.
I never suggested that Trump was intellectually curious. Rather he has an exaggerated trust in his own capacities. He regards himself as an all-purpose purveyor of common sense who can solve everything with a platitude or two.
I believe he was as surprised as Melania and the rest of us that he won.
He wanted to wear and market the badge of "I tried" back into his con job of "business".
I believe this falls into the category of you get what you pay for.
Halligan is now swimming with the big sharks in deep water.
She is in that ever growing club of trump attorneys who are disbarred, eventually.
May your post be prophetic.
Yes. Not too long at all.
Thanks Joyce for working so hard to keep us informed about Trump's efforts to turn our justice system into his own weapon of retribution. It must have been very late for you to get this out tonight.
So the battle is joined, in which judges faithful to their oaths and to the Constitution push back against the corrupt Trump administration and their efforts to turn justice on its head and use their power to persecute their political opponents. Thanks to Judges Fitzpatrick and Nachmanoff for applying the law without fear or favor. If there is a silver lining it is that the incompetence of Trump and his flying monkeys is being exposed and rejected by courts across the country and that their corruption is made clear to Americans who do not want to live in a dictatorship.
This is by far the most lucid explanation of the travesty of Justice that the DOJ has let loose on President Trump's political targets. What is most astounding is the idea that the Trump "prosecutor" responded to a question from a Grand Juror and asserted that the burden of proof in this criminal case would shift to the Defendant. If that is really was she said this is not a question of lack of experience. She either deliberately misstated the Law OR she is so incompetent that she should be disbarred on that ground alone. I hope that when Joyce has a chance ( and the further pleadings have been submitted to Judge Nachmanoff) she will shed further light on this aspect of the Travesty. Having practiced law for over 50 years, I find it hard to believe that there is ANY lawyer who thinks that there is ever a circumstance when a Defendant has to prove his innocence.
I've wondered where Bar Associations are with all of that. I've been told that they are timid about accusing members of misconduct. Maybe that's true. With all that lawyers have done to protect DJT, I'm sad that the Association's don't take a role to provide foundational support for their field. Maybe it's happening and just not being reported?
Isn't it true that professional organizations are often loathe to discipline their own?
Yes, often true! I suppose it's silly to suggest that Bar Associations highlight corruption among its members. Better to absorb all if it and hope for the best, I guess.
Absolutely true.
Unless the person studied only Napoleonic law, where that is true. Hahaha. Even a lax person knows that in the US you are innocent unless proven guilty.
"Flying monkeys" indeed. I knew there was a name for them and i think you have it. Thank you!
Even the flying monkeys in the Wizard of Oz came round once the witch melted!
Unless the person studied only Napoleonic law, where that is true. Hahaha. Even a lay person knows that in the US you are innocent unless proven guilty.
LIKE
REPLY
Nicely stated. Agree wholeheartedly.
That all sounds fairly brazen.
Did she think nobody would find out what she told the grand jury? Did she think that because she had been “chosen” that she could just tell them whatever she wanted and himself would make it all go away??
The case must be dismissed.
This is ridiculous.
Yes the case must be dismissed and discussed. It is a reminder of so many basic principles of our system. For example fairness and honesty in the process. I was on a grand jury and I learned the details of general principles that I had not thought of. One was to protect a person (accused or witness) from publicity until the there was probable cause that their was a crime done. Also to protect them from poor evidence etc. It is a complicated system to protect all of us. We need to be reminded of it in situations like this one.
These people have their own rule, and obey it; and the rule is Trump.
She wouldn't have been hired if she hadn't been willing to lie and cheat. Trump demands loyalty, no integrity, and shamelessness. Plus he demands hair extensions, Botox, and big breasts for women.
And drastic incompetence is a plus...
And look at the alluring way she tosses her mane of hair.
She definitely has "the Look" of Mar-a-Lago face.
"Mar-a-Lago face" --what a visual that evokes...
And at least 40 years younger than he is.
I'm ashamed that I can not resist adding to this thread.
How about Bimbo Barbie? Oh, probably too nasty. But we do have eyes.
Definitely not too nasty, Debbie, especially when it is the truth. The only bimbo that doesn’t seem to fit the bill is susie wiles. I am not sure where she fits in given that she doesn’t have that kind of required look about her. Oh, and these flying monkeys do not have the privilege of having their names capitalized.
See Rick Wilson’s “Run, Susie, Run” post for a complete picture of who Susie Wiles is. Fantastic, but disturbing, read. Worse than a Barbie because she comes from the “knowledgeable” side of the Republican Party and is doing this anyway.
I guess susie wiles (a fitting last name given to her by the universe) is the only one there who is not a stupid idiot.
Agree to all of that
So shallow and revolting how he picks women as attorneys...
Trump goes by loyalty to him, and appearance. He wants sycophants who are camera ready for his
administration 's social media posts.
Presumably Halligan and the other
younger women in Trump 's orbit are either true believers or cynics who think that being part of his circle will boost their careers post-Trump.
Not likely! They Reek of the stink of this administration.
I agree with that and they will be sorry later on
The NYT published an very good article by Emiky Bazelon about the destruction of DOJ by Trump during his first nine months in office. In thr articlr Bazelon reported that Eric Siebert, thr U.S. Atty for the ED, Va., had boasted abiut his links to Trump attorneys. Siebert was fired after his review of the Comey case found no grounds for indictment.
Competent, ethical attorneys are not risking their reputations to join Trump's witch hunts; this we get Halligan , who might know real estate or insurance law but who has no experience in criminal law. Halligan knows one thing: Donald Trump wants Comey's scalp.
Better they get full discovery and an acquittal!
Dismissal is fine because the statute of limitations has run, so can’t be refiled. Also, can do dismissal with prejudice which means, even if the SOL hadn’t run, they couldn’t file again.
But dismissal avoids the revelations of the discovery process -- allowing the DOJ malefactors to skate
True, but that just runs up Comey’s legal fees and prolongs the time he and his family have to spend going through the process. Too bad his daughter can’t just tell us what we want to know!
True dat.
Thank you, Joyce. If they can get away with bending the rules and evidence to suit the president in order to convict Comey and others, any of us could be next. If Trump is allowed to continue, he could be Putin and we could be Navalny. We can't allow it.
Maybe Epstein was our Navalny. (Not saying the two were moral equals.)
Bernie Sanders is/was our Navalny
Martin, no one would blame you if you deleted your post...
I think Martin is referring to how the two men "may have" died in custody.
jolting to see epstein and Navalny in the same sentence
perhaps
I thought the second sentence would have cleared up any confusion.
The common thread was untimely death in custody.
OK, but not easy to make the connection...I think because epstein is so awful and doesn't go with anyone in any comparison !
Whoah. “Rest assured the government has more evidence and perhaps better evidence to use at trial”?? So hand down an indictment now, because even if you didn’t see or hear it, I’m telling you that we have better evidence…I know next to nothing about how a grand jury works, but my sense of fairness tells me that this is just off the rails wrong.
And how did it happen that the indictment that was returned does not seem to be the one signed by the grand jury? Did the pretendsecutor use that old word processing trick, where she attached the signature page to a different document from whence it came? Or something similar? If so, she must be charged with criminal conduct.
Thank you for your continuing education, Joyce Vance. If you have some extra time, would you please become licensed in Georgia and take over the hanging prosecution there that begs for an experienced hand? We will feed your chickens…
“Rest assured the government has more evidence and perhaps better evidence to use at trial”: page 5 out of the Trump-brand playbook. Bait the hook and see how many bite.
#pretensecutor
I just love this new name so much.
That's perfect, Suze.
🤣🤣🤣
it's like: "are you going to believe me or your lyin' eyes'!
It is very bothersome that governmental misconduct has become not just the rule … but “accepted” behavior. Likewise sexual abuse, business fraud, dishonesty, civility.
From this incredibly foul administration such behavior has become "expected" by most Americans. It is unfortunate that it is also "accepted" by a large number of those Americans.
The numbing of America … the dumbing of America
Very true!
Absolutely, James. We see more and more of foul behavior every day. Not so much here in Maine. There are so few of us, and we're so old, we can't afford to piss off our neighbors. And, it is really Cold.
This ancient native of Rhode Island ended up being transferred to Hawaii in 1993. He ain’t gonna shovel snow ever again.😁
I'm an ancient (80) native of the deep South, but I chose the Northwoods and the hardy, plainspoken people over Florida. Would get Island fever on an island, no matter how lovely. A visit there would be lovely!!
Here's where my chin hit my keyboard and my eyes bugged out so far they stuck to my screen, as i read and re-read it: "If this procedure [presentation of the second indictment to the grand jury, legal directions to them, and their deliberation upon it] did not take place [because there is no record of it in the transcript or audio recording], then the court is in uncharted legal territory in that the indictment returned in open court was not the same charging document presented to and deliberated upon by the grand jury." [brackets are mine]
Dog Bless America! How could Halligan think this childish chicanery would not be discovered?
And then the court's even-mannered summation that "...this unusual series of events calls into question the presumption of regularity generally associated with grand jury proceedings and provides another genuine issue the defense may raise to challenge the manner in which the government obtained the indictment." (Ya think??!! I want to call her every four-letter name i can think of and then invent some more, but how effective and literate this writing is!)
On one hand, the attempted cheating is "holy sh*t!" On the other, the court's insight into it, and response to it, is "BEAUTIFUL!"
Halligan sounds like a used car salesman, or one of those awful late-night ads for knives or garden hoses. To the Grand Jury “Hey if this isn’t enough for you, I’ve got this and this and this and wait - there’s more!” Except it isn’t funny because any one of us could be sitting there at the mercy of a vindictive Trump prosecution. So in all seriousness, thank you for taking the time to explain exactly what is going on in such a clear, concise and understandable manner.
Wonder if she will be able to get even the real estate business now. Would you hire her? Look at the long list of people who have been tainted by association with tRump. He can Parden all of them, but They will never work in this town again, said a movie mogul.
So true. Their reputations have been destroyed. It’s amazing so many people are so mesmerized by this grifting con artist - they can’t and/or won’t look at the literally hundreds of lives he’s destroyed and think “Hmmm maybe I should stay away from this creep.” Of course, 70 + million people thought he’d make their lives better too…I don’t see that working out too well for them, no matter how much they profess their love for him.
Looking at your comment again, I was reminded of the old George M. Cohan song "Harrigan". But "Harrigan" seen in the twisted funhouse mirror becomes "Halligan." So we get the paraphrased lyrics.
"H-A-double L-I G-A-N you see,
It's a name that much shame quickly has been connected with;
Halligan. That's she."
Apparently, this is just business as usual for lazy, sloppy, trumpist DOJ prosecutors. I am heartened by the fact that we still have judges who are holding fast to our Constitutional rule of law. They need our support.
Lazy, sloppy and corrupt.
So thankful the obvious has come out. It turns out there are consequences to appointing a beauty queen at the last minute to handle a political prosecution without merit. Who knew?
Thank you, Joyce, for helping to dot the i's, cross the t's, and expose the fraud and absurdity for exactly what it is.
I would like to know the significance of Bondi’s purported ratification of the grand jury proceedings. It seems to me she is besmirched in a big way. Is such ratification signed under penalty of perjury?
Can both Halligan and Bondi be disbarred over this?
Any legal filing signed by an attorney is an attestation that the information contained is true and correct. It would be potential grounds for disbarment to willfully mislead a court. Also a basis for contempt proceedings (which are occuring now in an unrelated case in front of Judge Boasberg). The DOJʻs reputation is completely gone now and courts are not giving the government the presumption of regularity now. Thank goodness for experienced jurists who are not intimidated by the Trump regime.
Thank you for the concise explanation. To a lay person like me, it sounds like Director Comey should be able to be set free. The question is, who is going to be responsible for his legal fees😡😡😡
I think the courts should make Trump pay for his legal wrangling😡
Take a page from tRump's book, sue everyone for reimbursement.
Now I get it. Of course there was misconduct, she thought she was on an ambulance chasing case,and she could make up whatever she wanted
What’s happened to the DOJ is very sad. So many prosecuting authorities in the USA are terribly compromised by incompetence or corruption, yet the Feds have historically carried the torch for the rule of law as properly understood.
That deserved reputation was hard earned. It may take years to restore after the work of these shit-flinging monkeys is done.
The Trump stench will linger far after he is gone (may it be soon). Let it begin with the loss of professional licenses by those who willingly engaged in illegal acts to please their master.
At Nuremberg, German jurists who had served the Nazi regime stood accused of “judicial murder and other atrocities, which they committed by destroying law and justice in Germany and then utilizing the emptied forms of legal process for the persecution, enslavement, and extermination on a large scale.”
Background: Jurists' Trial Verdict | Holocaust Encyclopedia
From 1946 through 1949, under the aegis of the International Military Tribunal, American occupying authorities carried out a series of 12 subsequent trials in Nuremberg against surviving members of the military, political, economic, medical, and juridical leadership cadres of Nazi Germany.
In the case of the US v. Josef Altstötter, et al., an American military tribunal tried members of the Reich Ministry of Justice as well as jurists and prosecutors of the People's Court [Volksgericht] and Special Court [Sondergericht].
.https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/background-jurists-trial-verdict.
Out of the ten Nazi judges who were found guilty all but one were released by 1957.
"Out of the ten Nazi judges who were found guilty all but one were released by 1957."
Your point?
More than the individuals involved was the exercise and the precedent. The point of emphasizing the significance of an independent judiciary.
There is a reason Charles Koch bagman Leonard Leo focused on court capture in the drive to hollow out the foundations of the American democratic republic - equality before the law, equal representation, and separation of church and state. They needed to overturn the Constitution to drain US law of justice in order to legitimize their ChristoFascist kleptocracy. They pounced on the judiciary as the branch least accessible and least answerable to the people.
My point is that it's not a great example because the United States was even by then more concerned with the threat of Soviet communism than with punishing prominent nazis. many were allowed to escape, and some even ended up in the US.
https://www.npr.org/2014/11/05/361427276/how-thousands-of-nazis-were-rewarded-with-life-in-the-u-s
I would also point out that Trump has attacked Leo for his judicial appointments recommendations, some of whom have refused to go along with Trump's lawless behaviour
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jun/08/trump-federalist-society-conservative-legal
and also that Leo and Koch filed a lawsuit against Trump over his tariffs policy.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/apr/07/trump-tariffs-lawsuit
If the plan was to subvert the judiciary then it doesn't seem to be working since when the courts have reached decisions on the merits of a case they have almost always ruled against the administration - the single exception being the Supreme Court with its inbuilt conservative majority.
Excellent debate points, John.
"If the plan was to subvert the judiciary then it doesn't seem to be working since when the courts have reached decisions on the merits of a case they have almost always ruled against the administration - the single exception being the Supreme Court with its inbuilt conservative majority."
Missing the forest for some trees much? Is it possible that you are not aware of how the Federalist Society - under and through Leo - has remade the American judiciary? For the worse. Throwing up some recent decisions (not all by Leo picks) and Trump's hissy fit is not really an argument against Leo's efficacy.
HaHa. The Supreme Court. A significant single exception, no? The right wing religious extremist majority with a bent for privileging the white and wealthy. And for abusing the Shadow Docket. Inbuilt? Seriously? Hand picked by Leonard Leo. Who also funds a wide range of antidemocratic and anti constitutional amicus briefs before his hand crafted Supreme Court majority.
Here is Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse on the tiff.
Trump vs Leonard Leo
https://youtu.be/vHOZzjk_lAo?si=xMOi_IyPWoseP9-W
Despite Trump Outburst at Leonard Leo, DOJ Continues to Fulfill Leo’s Wish List
.https://truthout.org/articles/despite-trump-outburst-at-leonard-leo-doj-continues-to-fulfill-leos-wish-list/.
Trump’s War With Leonard Leo Could Expose a Conservative Legal Scam | The New Republic
https://newrepublic.com/article/196007/tariffs-court-trump-leonard-leo
Ahmmm, Ken. They did not even carry a match in the Civil Rights battles in the South when I was a part of that. And as was often said on the old Saturday Night Live....And That's the Truth!!
And an interesting and valuable exchange of ideas. One of the reasons I love Substack
I agree, James. Aren't we all a "fabulous" bunch? Thanks to Joyce above all.
Thanks, Debbie. I did not mean to imply that the DOJ has always prosecuted where it should.
As Joyce has indicated, an honourable prosecutor (or, for that matter any honourable advocate) lives with a consciousness of his or her responsibility for integrity of the legal process. Doing your homework so that you actually know your brief, not mis-stating facts or law, not hiding witnesses or evidence, candour with the court; these sorts of things matter not only to the particular case but to society's broader acceptance of courts' decisions.
Wow! Thank you. I understand and appreciate the time to explain it all. We are lucky to have you.
Thank you for that complete and sane explanation of this insane situation.