Pommer
Future History Slab Carver
- Sep 13, 2008
- 25,064
- 15,256
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Deist
- Marital Status
- In Relationship
- Politics
- US-Democrat
His lawyers will challenge the indictment several ways, this would be one. But I don’t think that the case even gets this far. Common (if vague) vernacular is too innocent to prove intent to have harm befall the president, let alone having to stand trial for such.My question is, setting aside the strength of the prosecution itself, whether Comey can get this rejected as selective prosecution.
This is all “and-too”, it’s clearly protected speech, selective-prosecution is down the list.As I understand it, it's not enough to prove you're being prosecuted because the attorney (or someone that's their superior) dislikes you, you have to also prove that you're being targeted but not others for committing similar crimes. As some people have been quick to point out, there's various "86 47" instances that have received zero prosecutions--in fact, I don't think anyone has been prosecuted for that. Whether that's enough to satisfy the requirements I don't know, given as I understand it's really hard to get something dismissed for this, but it would seem he has a stronger than usual case given Trump's clear animus towards him, combined with the ability to point to people using the exact same phrase (sometimes with a stronger argument that they're being actively threatening than Comey was) that haven't been prosecuted.
Upvote
0