Judge dismisses James Comey and Letitia James cases, finding prosecutor's appointment invalid

[wing2000]

That one judge is merely attempting to help Comey and James instead of allowing them to go to trial.

On what basis was the case dismissed?

I guess you don't know.

 

[Fantine]

The Courts cannot become henchmen for a vindictive vengeful man to assauge his hurt feelings. Good decision

 

[FAITH-IN-HIM]

Don't cheer too quickly -

Thank you for publicly sharing the perspectives of the administration.

 

[FAITH-IN-HIM]

She ain't a liar.

If she always tells the truth in the White House press room, she would be the first U.S. press secretary in history not to lie.

 

[FAITH-IN-HIM]

That one judge is merely attempting to help Comey and James instead of allowing them to go to trial.

If the judge was biased, the case should be appealed to a higher court to seek reversal of the judge's decision.

I have confidence in the American judicial system. While I may not always concur with its decisions, I believe that, in most cases, our courts and judiciary have acted with greater honor and adherence to the law compared to other branches of government.

 

[essentialsaltes]

The Justice Department is still signing criminal indictments with Lindsey Halligan’s name—almost a day after a judge ruled that she was unlawfully appointed as interim U.S. attorney.

Federal prosecutors were initially instructed to sign court filings in the name of Halligan’s first assistant, after U.S. District Judge Cameron Currie concluded Monday that Halligan had no authority to preside over the Eastern District of Virginia since she was never confirmed by the U.S. Senate. But just an hour later, internal emails instructed the department to continue using Halligan’s name, labeling Currie’s decision “premature,” reported MS NOW’s Lisa Rubin.

--

Humiliated Lindsey Halligan insists underlings still refer to her as 'US attorney'​

“In the meantime, as Ken noted, we have evidence that Lindsey Halligan is insisting on continuing to call herself the United States attorney, not a special attorney, as Pam Bondi has designated her, and not any other sort of interim title that would allow her to maintain control of the office, but defiantly continuing to call herself the united states attorney, even in court filings."

“That is the directive to career prosecutors in that office, well before the appeal is filed, well before any stay has been applied for from the federal court of appeals,“ she added.

 

[Vambram]

Bondi targets James Comey, Letitia James in legal battle: 'Hold... accountable for unlawful conduct'

Attorney General Pam Bondi defends prosecutor Lindsey Halligan and promises legal action after court dismisses cases against James Comey and Letitia James.

www.foxnews.com

 

[DaisyDay]

Bondi targets James Comey, Letitia James in legal battle: 'Hold... accountable for unlawful conduct'

Attorney General Pam Bondi defends prosecutor Lindsey Halligan and promises legal action after court dismisses cases against James Comey and Letitia James.

www.foxnews.com

Such a shame that a once well respected office has come down to this. Bondi should seek her pardon before Trump gets 25thed.

 

[Richard T]

That progressive liberal judge doesn't know the facts. She made a political decision instead of a lawful decision.

She ain't a liar.

Karoline Leavitt dishes out lies and insults at the White House – Baptist News Global

Infamous for his own trail of lies, Trump has a press secretary following in his wake both as a liar and as a crude name-caller.

baptistnews.com

BBC ‘100% fake news’, says Donald Trump’s press secretary

Comments by Karoline Leavitt follow allegations that Panorama documentary misled viewers with its editing of a Trump speech

www.theguardian.com

https://people.com/karoline-leavitt-tells-reporter-trump-s-piggy-insult-shows-he-s-respectful-11854064

Everyone lies, it is part of our sin nature. Some just lie more than others. Psychologists have studied this enough that most psych tests will have questions on lying. Answer that you never lie may get your pre-employment application thrown out.

The above may show ignorance, hyperbole but perhaps not purposeful lies? Like the BBC is 100% fake news. Anyway, as to the case, from what I read it was quite legal. Not every court is political
A true progressive judge would have likely dismissed to where it can not be tried again. They did a favor to Trump because the insurance lawyer with no trial experience was losing the case.
Here is just one excerpt from google ai on this judge.
"U.S. District Judge Cameron McGowan Currie is considered
highly qualified and is widely respected in the legal community for her extensive experience, procedural rigor, and knowledge of the law."

 

[Vambram]

Karoline Leavitt dishes out lies and insults at the White House – Baptist News Global

Infamous for his own trail of lies, Trump has a press secretary following in his wake both as a liar and as a crude name-caller.

baptistnews.com

BBC ‘100% fake news’, says Donald Trump’s press secretary

Comments by Karoline Leavitt follow allegations that Panorama documentary misled viewers with its editing of a Trump speech

www.theguardian.com

https://people.com/karoline-leavitt-tells-reporter-trump-s-piggy-insult-shows-he-s-respectful-11854064

Everyone lies, it is part of our sin nature. Some just lie more than others. Psychologists have studied this enough that most psych tests will have questions on lying. Answer that you never lie may get your pre-employment application thrown out.

The above may show ignorance, hyperbole but perhaps not purposeful lies? Like the BBC is 100% fake news. Anyway, as to the case, from what I read it was quite legal. Not every court is political
A true progressive judge would have likely dismissed to where it can not be tried again. They did a favor to Trump because the insurance lawyer with no trial experience was losing the case.
Here is just one excerpt from google ai on this judge.
"U.S. District Judge Cameron McGowan Currie is considered
highly qualified and is widely respected in the legal community for her extensive experience, procedural rigor, and knowledge of the law."

Comey, James Escape Justice For Now Thanks To 'Partisan Judge'

"This abuse of judicial power was aided by the legislative branch," legal analyst Keith Gross told The Federalist.

thefederalist.com

 

[Vambram]

Comey, James Escape Justice For Now Thanks To 'Partisan Judge'

"This abuse of judicial power was aided by the legislative branch," legal analyst Keith Gross told The Federalist.

thefederalist.com

I agree with Keith Gross and Mike Davis.

 

[CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN]

That one judge is merely attempting to help Comey and James instead of allowing them to go to trial.

Why should they go through a trial, when they didn't do anything wrong. And they are just being harassed because Trump doesn't like them. I think they should sue Trump and his workers for harassment, Terrorizing, false firing and lying on them , especially James Comey.

 

[Say it aint so]

I agree with Keith Gross and Mike Davis.

Too bad for Gross and Davis they literally passed a law, signed by Bush in 2007 that makes their arguments irrelevant.

 

[Vambram]

Too bad for Gross and Davis they literally passed a law, signed by Bush in 2007 that makes their arguments irrelevant.

What law, specifically?

 

[Vambram]

Why should they go through a trial, when they didn't do anything wrong. And they are just being harassed because Trump doesn't like them. I think they should sue Trump and his workers for harassment, Terrorizing, false firing and lying on them , especially James Comey.

Comey lied to Congress.
James lied on her mortgage form. Both actions are crimes.

 

[JSRG]

I agree with Keith Gross and Mike Davis.

It looks so far in this topic that you just agree with anyone who happens to say the dismissal is wrong, regardless of whether their arguments make any sense or whether they have any argument at all. Thus you previously as evidence cited Leavitt, who offers no argument as to why it's wrong, isn't a lawyer, and whose job as White House Press Secretary more or less entails just saying everything that the White House does is correct and thus is one of the most biased sources possible. Gross and Davis, at least in regards to how your linked article presents their views, fare little better.

Keith Gross offers no argument against the judge's reading of the law involved, but instead claims the law is unconstitutional (an argument it does not appear anyone involved in the case made, for the record). The problem is, even if that's the case, that's the law they used to try to appoint Halligan, which the judge--in a rather straightforward reading of the law--ruled was not allowed by the law. However, if that law is unconstitutional, that would still mean her appointment was unlawful. Gross's opinion would appear to actually strengthen the argument for Halligan being unlawfully appointed.

Mike Davis similarly offers no real argument against the dismissal. The closest thing he offers is claiming that the evidence against Comey is "overwhelming". Even if we accept that claim (which seems rather questionable), that does not mean anything at all in regards to this dismissal, which was regarding whether Halligan was lawfully appointed. It does not matter how strong the evidence in a case is if the prosecutor was not lawfully appointed.

 

[JSRG]

Comey lied to Congress.

Maybe you can help the prosecution find the lie, because they seem to be struggling on that point:

The Situation: Where’s the Lie?

The government’s response to James Comey’s vindictive prosecution raises one very big and important question.

www.lawfaremedia.org

Here the specific text of the question Comey answered in his testimony matters a lot—for a number of reasons. Grassley asked Comey: “have you ever authorized someone else at the FBI to be an anonymous source in news reports about the Trump investigation or the Clinton investigation” (emphasis added).

It is thus not adequate for proof that Comey made a false statement for the government to show that Richman interfaced with reporters on Comey’s behalf. That fact has never been a secret (Richman did much of this work in the open and on a named basis), and Comey has never denied it. In fact, it was Comey who dramatically announced Richman’s role in Senate testimony that the brief later quotes (see pages 10-11).

Rather, to prove that Comey lied, the government has to show (a) that Richman was “at the FBI” at the time; (b) that Comey “authorized” the press contact; (c) that he authorized Richman to do the contact anonymously; and (d) that the contact concerned the Trump or Clinton investigation.

The article then goes on to do what seems to me to be a very good job explaining how none of the things the prosecution tries to point to in their filing as evidence actually show the aforementioned things required to make Comey's statement false. So, where's the lie?

That said, once again, even if the government had the strongest evidence possible that Comey lied, that wouldn't have any effect on the question of whether Halligan's appointment was lawful.