• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

James Comey Indicted... again... for...

Pommer

Future History Slab Carver
Sep 13, 2008
25,064
15,256
Earth
✟300,738.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Deist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Democrat
My question is, setting aside the strength of the prosecution itself, whether Comey can get this rejected as selective prosecution.
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.

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.
This is all “and-too”, it’s clearly protected speech, selective-prosecution is down the list.
 
Upvote 0

Pommer

Future History Slab Carver
Sep 13, 2008
25,064
15,256
Earth
✟300,738.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Deist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Democrat
There could be more evidence, the investigation has gone over a year, but I doubt that they have a case they can win.
Which violates their own rule. Why have the rule?
 
Upvote 0

Vambram

Born-again Christian; Constitutional conservative
Site Supporter
Dec 3, 2006
9,703
6,628
61
Saint James, Missouri
✟546,105.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Upvote 0

Say it aint so

Well-Known Member
Jun 19, 2020
4,937
4,179
28
Seattle
✟222,732.00
Country
United States
Faith
Deist
Marital Status
Single
  • Haha
Reactions: iluvatar5150
Upvote 0

Gene2memE

Newbie
Oct 22, 2013
4,931
7,658
✟374,468.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private

What a lot of baloney.

The fundamental case it makes sits in opposition to the first amendment of the US constitution.

For it to be a "true threat" against the president, and not selective & vindicitive prosecution, the case has to be made that the speech was intentionally calling for targeted violence that a reasonable person would interpret a serious expression of harm against the president.

Look at US v Daulong (1945). The language of that ruling makes it clear that there must be an "expression of determination or intent to do the act itself, that is, to take the life of the President" and that "the offense is not committed by the mere thinking, imagining, or wishing to do the things involved. Here, there must be the positive expression of intent and purpose, presently or in the future, to do the thing denounced."
 
Upvote 0

Always in His Presence

Jesus is the only Way
Site Supporter
Nov 15, 2006
52,691
18,101
Broken Arrow, OK
✟1,209,003.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Upvote 0

DaisyDay

I Did Nothing Wrong!! ~~Team Deep State
Jan 7, 2003
44,153
21,379
Finger Lakes
✟373,271.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Unitarian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others

Judge schedules criminal trial for James Comey for July 15


A federal judge on Friday set a July 15 trial date for former FBI Director James Comey on his new criminal charges of threatening President Trump.
From theHill article:

Comey denies wrongdoing and has portrayed it as a retribution campaign. His previous criminal charges were dismissed, and his attorneys have previewed that they will seek to toss the new indictment as a selective and vindictive prosecution.

Flanagan ordered them to file it and other pretrial motions by June 5. The judge signaled she may schedule additional hearings to decide them.
 
Upvote 0

SimplyMe

Senior Veteran
Jul 19, 2003
10,747
10,500
the Great Basin
✟427,781.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Grand jury indictments are well known for being extremely easy to achieve, because everything is so stacked in favor of the prosecution. Hence the saying one could indict a ham sandwich. That said, it's been noted that the DOJ under Trump has been failing more indictments than is typical, indicating either an increase in spurious cases, a decrease in competent prosecutors, or possibly both.

Still, the grand jury process remains easy enough that even silly indictments can get through, which this one appears to be, absent very strong evidence we are unaware of.

Yes. I also recall, when Trump was indicted, they trotted out the "ham sandwich" phrase as a defense of Trump. Odd how they now seem to have decided that indictments indicate some type of wrong doing.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Pommer
Upvote 0

A2SG

Gumby
Jun 17, 2008
10,737
4,395
Massachusetts
✟215,029.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
Yes. I also recall, when Trump was indicted, they trotted out the "ham sandwich" phrase as a defense of Trump. Odd how they now seem to have decided that indictments indicate some type of wrong doing.
Ah yes, the classic Trump Double Standard: if it's done TO him, it's wrong, evil and unconstitutional. If it's done BY him, it's perfectly okay.

-- A2SG, so long as it "owns the libs"...
 
Upvote 0

Say it aint so

Well-Known Member
Jun 19, 2020
4,937
4,179
28
Seattle
✟222,732.00
Country
United States
Faith
Deist
Marital Status
Single

Lead prosecutor on former FBI Director Comey's 'seashells' case withdraws without explanation

The lead prosecutor tasked with overseeing former FBI Director James Comey's prosecution stemming from his post of seashells that the Justice Department claims amounted to a threat against President Donald Trump has withdrawn from the case, according to a court filing.
Matthew Petracca was the lone prosecutor from the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of North Carolina assigned to the case when it was unsealed late last month.
On Friday evening, however, the Justice Department filed a notice with the court indicating that Petracca has been replaced by assistant U.S. Attorney Timothy Severo.
 
Upvote 0

Gene2memE

Newbie
Oct 22, 2013
4,931
7,658
✟374,468.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Mixed blessing. The departing prosecutor was a neophyte and apparent regime toady/yes man.

His replacement is a man with 20+ years of experience and who, under standing DoJ instructions, is required to zealously pursue the government's case or get fired.

Also, isn't this the second lead proecutor that's dropped off the case in the last few months?
 
Upvote 0

Say it aint so

Well-Known Member
Jun 19, 2020
4,937
4,179
28
Seattle
✟222,732.00
Country
United States
Faith
Deist
Marital Status
Single
Mixed blessing. The departing prosecutor was a neophyte and apparent regime toady/yes man.

His replacement is a man with 20+ years of experience and who, under standing DoJ instructions, is required to zealously pursue the government's case or get fired.

Also, isn't this the second lead proecutor that's dropped off the case in the last few months?
Hurry, hurry, hurry. Step right up and get your sanction!
 
Upvote 0

camille70

Newbie
Site Supporter
Mar 4, 2007
4,401
4,287
Ohio
Visit site
✟827,711.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Judge Rules “8647” Is Free Speech in ark Permit case.


This decision will obviously be cited when Comey moves to dismiss the ridiculous weaponized justice case against him.
 
Upvote 0

Pommer

Future History Slab Carver
Sep 13, 2008
25,064
15,256
Earth
✟300,738.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Deist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Democrat
Judge Rules “8647” Is Free Speech in [P]ark Permit case.


This decision will obviously be cited when Comey moves to dismiss the ridiculous weaponized justice case against him.
The court’s decision on issuing the requested TRO, (for them what want to get into the weeds).
 
  • Like
Reactions: camille70
Upvote 0