CacheCougar
Well-known member
Federal indictment against former FBI Director James Comey seeks dismissal due to allegations of vindictive prosecution and improper appointment of interim US Attorney Lindsey Halligan.
In a move that has significant implications for the case, attorneys for Comey have filed motions seeking to have the two-count federal indictment against him dismissed before a potential trial date early next year. The motions argue that the charges are based on an "egregious abuse of power" and that there are "multiple glaring constitutional violations" in the indictment.
Comey's lawyers claim that the charges arose due to personal spite by President Trump, who has a long history of criticizing Comey for his handling of the FBI's investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 election. The indictment was announced just days after Trump took social media to voice frustration with Attorney General Pam Bondi for not bringing criminal charges against Comey and two other political opponents.
The lawyers also argue that Halligan, who was appointed as interim US Attorney by President Trump, was defectively appointed to her office and that the indictment is "equally a nullity" and should be dismissed. They claim that no properly appointed official from the executive branch obtained the indictment against Comey, which would render it invalid.
In another twist, federal prosecutors have indicated that they may seek to have Comey's attorney, Patrick Fitzgerald, disqualified due to his alleged involvement in leaking classified information related to a memo shared by Comey with Fitzgerald earlier this year. Prosecutors claim that this could raise questions about conflict of interest and disqualification for current lead defense counsel.
The case has significant implications for the Justice Department and the Trump administration's attempts to bypass the Senate confirmation process for U.S. Attorney appointments. A federal judge in New Jersey recently found that Alina Habba was serving without lawful authority as the U.S. attorney, while a similar challenge in Nevada resulted in a ruling that Sigal Chattah was also serving illegally.
As the case unfolds, Comey's lawyers are likely to continue arguing that the charges against him are the result of a vindictive prosecution and improper appointment of Halligan. The outcome could have significant implications for the Justice Department and the Trump administration's efforts to shape the country's law enforcement priorities.
The indictment against Comey has been criticized by some as an example of selective or vindictive prosecution, with former prosecutors saying that the circumstances surrounding his indictment could be a boon to his lawyers in having the charges tossed out. However, claims of this nature are difficult to prevail on, and it remains to be seen how Judge Michael Nachmanoff will rule on the motions filed by Comey's attorneys.
The developments in the case highlight the ongoing tensions between the Justice Department and the Trump administration, as well as the challenges faced by prosecutors in navigating complex cases involving high-profile figures. As the case continues to unfold, observers will be watching closely for any signs of progress or setbacks that could impact its outcome.
In a move that has significant implications for the case, attorneys for Comey have filed motions seeking to have the two-count federal indictment against him dismissed before a potential trial date early next year. The motions argue that the charges are based on an "egregious abuse of power" and that there are "multiple glaring constitutional violations" in the indictment.
Comey's lawyers claim that the charges arose due to personal spite by President Trump, who has a long history of criticizing Comey for his handling of the FBI's investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 election. The indictment was announced just days after Trump took social media to voice frustration with Attorney General Pam Bondi for not bringing criminal charges against Comey and two other political opponents.
The lawyers also argue that Halligan, who was appointed as interim US Attorney by President Trump, was defectively appointed to her office and that the indictment is "equally a nullity" and should be dismissed. They claim that no properly appointed official from the executive branch obtained the indictment against Comey, which would render it invalid.
In another twist, federal prosecutors have indicated that they may seek to have Comey's attorney, Patrick Fitzgerald, disqualified due to his alleged involvement in leaking classified information related to a memo shared by Comey with Fitzgerald earlier this year. Prosecutors claim that this could raise questions about conflict of interest and disqualification for current lead defense counsel.
The case has significant implications for the Justice Department and the Trump administration's attempts to bypass the Senate confirmation process for U.S. Attorney appointments. A federal judge in New Jersey recently found that Alina Habba was serving without lawful authority as the U.S. attorney, while a similar challenge in Nevada resulted in a ruling that Sigal Chattah was also serving illegally.
As the case unfolds, Comey's lawyers are likely to continue arguing that the charges against him are the result of a vindictive prosecution and improper appointment of Halligan. The outcome could have significant implications for the Justice Department and the Trump administration's efforts to shape the country's law enforcement priorities.
The indictment against Comey has been criticized by some as an example of selective or vindictive prosecution, with former prosecutors saying that the circumstances surrounding his indictment could be a boon to his lawyers in having the charges tossed out. However, claims of this nature are difficult to prevail on, and it remains to be seen how Judge Michael Nachmanoff will rule on the motions filed by Comey's attorneys.
The developments in the case highlight the ongoing tensions between the Justice Department and the Trump administration, as well as the challenges faced by prosecutors in navigating complex cases involving high-profile figures. As the case continues to unfold, observers will be watching closely for any signs of progress or setbacks that could impact its outcome.
I'm low-key surprised that Comey's lawyers are pushing back so hard against these charges 
. It seems like they're trying to say that Trump's involvement in the appointment of Lindsey Halligan is super shady 
. The fact that Halligan wasn't properly appointed to her position could definitely raise some red flags 
. I'm also worried about Patrick Fitzgerald getting disqualified as Comey's lawyer 
. If that happens, it could be a major blow to Comey's defense team 
, but one thing is for sure: this case has huge implications for the Justice Department and the country as a whole 
. I'm curious to see how Judge Nachmanoff will rule on these motions 
. Will he throw out the charges or let them stand? 
We'll just have to wait and see 
this is getting crazy! can't believe what's happening with james comey's indictment. so many people think it was a setup by trump and his team... like how they just appointed lindsey halligan as interim us attorney without following the proper process? 
Comey's lawyers are definitely on to something with the vindictive prosecution claim. if this goes all the way to trial, we might see some major blowback for the trump admin 
oh my gosh I'm soooo worried about Jim's situation 
he seems like such a good person and I just know his lawyers are gonna fight so hard for him 
fingers crossed for Jim 
seriously though, this whole thing reeks of politics and power plays, not justice. i'm all for holdin' people accountable, but if it's gonna be based on trump's personal vendetta then that's just sad 
Was it just Trump or was there someone else pulling the strings? We'll just have to wait and see how it all plays out.