About that now famous directive to Pam.

[berg80]

Well, it turns out - as I knew it would -"Vindictive Prosecution" doesn't mean what you think it means.

It means exactly what I think it means.

His lawyer, Patrick Fitzgerald, said he would seek to dismiss the indictment on the basis of "vindictive prosecution," meaning he will seek to show the charges were brought against Comey in retaliation for him exercising his legal rights.

https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/trumps-call-prosecute-comey-could-bolster-former-fbi-directors-defense-2025-10-10/

 

[berg80]

If he did not commit crimes, he has nothing to worry about (About which to worry?).

And yet Dotard has enlisted the help of the MAGAverse in endlessly claiming the justice system has been completely corrupted against him because he was indicted for committing multiple crimes. Perhaps because he did have something to worry about.

 

[Hafar1014]

And yet Dotard has enlisted the help of the MAGAverse in endlessly claiming the justice system has been completely corrupted against him because he was indicted for committing multiple crimes. Perhaps because he did have something to worry about.

All the cases against him dropped collapsed or were dismissed

 

[Delldude]

It means exactly what I think it means.

His lawyer, Patrick Fitzgerald, said he would seek to dismiss the indictment on the basis of "vindictive prosecution," meaning he will seek to show the charges were brought against Comey in retaliation for him exercising his legal rights.

https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/trumps-call-prosecute-comey-could-bolster-former-fbi-directors-defense-2025-10-10/

Hope they don't counter with Russia Russia Russia.

 

[Seymour Flops]

I don't think it's necessarily a defense....but it is reason for a judge to dismiss a case.

Not legally, it isn't.

We've gotten so used to judges over-ruling the president at every turn, that you may be under the impression that low-level federal judges can just do anything they want, so long as it is motivated by someing legitimate such as Trump Derangement.

What you may not have noticed is that nearly all of such rulings are temporary, pending the lawyers that filed the lawsuits presenting evidence that what Trump was doing is unlawful. Then many of the restraining orders are over-turned by higher courts. Because it is NOT illegal, for example, to deport an illegal alien.

So, sure. A judge may "throw out" the case against Comey. But the dismissal will be appealed and the prosecution will win the appeal. Mainly because factually, Comey certainly lied under oath and to congress. Higher courts take a dim view of lying under oath.

The terrible part is that even if somehow Comey is guilty, he will experience the adage that "the process is the punishment" first hand. That gandar sauce probably won't taste as good to Comey as when he was feeding it to the goose.

 

[j-mac]

Oooooooops.

White House admits Trump’s message to Bondi to prosecute enemies was supposed to be a DM: report​

Donald Trump’s Truth Social post urging Attorney General Pam Bondi to prosecute his perceived political enemies without “delay” was intended to be a private message, according to administration officials.

A post from the president’s account September 20 addressed to “Pam” demands “justice be served” against his former FBI director James Comey, who was indicted five days later.

Trump — suggesting in his post that the prosecution of his favored targets is retribution for his impeachments and indictments against him — believed he had sent Bondi the message directly, and was surprised to learn it was public, The Wall Street Journal reported.

Trump’s message to Bondi to prosecute enemies was supposed to be a DM

Apparent error provides another glimpse into radically reshaped Justice Department under Trump’s command

www.the-independent.com

I thought it was surprising, even for someone who has no fear of impeachment, or prosecution, or losing support from his base for anything he does, to be so open about an astonishingly corrupt directive given to his astonishingly corrupt AG.

There seems to be little doubt the message will be exhibit 1 when Jim Comey's lawyer asks the judge to dismiss the charges against him due to vindictive prosecution. I see no reason Letitia's attorney won't do the same. trump having handed them the motion on a proverbial silver platter.

The note to Pam to get going prosecuting trump's enemies, the firing of Seibert and his deputy to make way for the eminently compliant Lindsey Halligan, the hapless indictment of Comey minus pertinent details, the declination on the part of line prosecutors to touch either case for a lack of evidence...........it's like watching a satirical play, too absurd to be believable, being acted out in real life.

If they broke the law, then they deserve the consequences.

 

[berg80]

So, sure. A judge may "throw out" the case against Comey. But the dismissal will be appealed and the prosecution will win the appeal. Mainly because factually, Comey certainly lied under oath and to congress. Higher courts take a dim view of lying under oath.

In the opinion of the Repub US Attorney who investigated the case, and his deputy, there was not sufficient evidence to obtain a conviction.

Does Dotard really want to appeal a ruling which will no doubt largely be based on his now public demand of the blonde sock puppet that she get on with the business of prosecuting his enemies?

Prosecutors' memo to new US attorney found no probable cause to charge James Comey: Sources​

Prosecutors' memo to new US attorney found no probable cause to charge James Comey: Sources

In a memo this week, prosecutors in Virginia recommended against potential plans by the new U.S. attorney there to charge ex-FBI Director James Comey, sources say.

abcnews.go.com

 

[Marener]

So, sure. A judge may "throw out" the case against Comey. But the dismissal will be appealed and the prosecution will win the appeal. Mainly because factually, Comey certainly lied under oath and to congress. Higher courts take a dim view of lying under oath.

Whether Comey lied hasn’t been determined yet, we don’t even know what they think he lied about exactly.

Pretrial motion to dismiss based on vindictive or selective prosecution will hinge on the motivations of the Trump administration which were laid bare publicly.

The terrible part is that even if somehow Comey is guilty, he will experience the adage that "the process is the punishment" first hand. That gandar sauce probably won't taste as good to Comey as when he was feeding it to the goose.

This is exactly the point about dismissing based on vindictive prosecution. People shouldn’t have to suffer the punishment of the process just because the president hates them.

 

[Care4all]

Not legally, it isn't.

We've gotten so used to judges over-ruling the president at every turn, that you may be under the impression that low-level federal judges can just do anything they want, so long as it is motivated by someing legitimate such as Trump Derangement.

What you may not have noticed is that nearly all of such rulings are temporary, pending the lawyers that filed the lawsuits presenting evidence that what Trump was doing is unlawful. Then many of the restraining orders are over-turned by higher courts. Because it is NOT illegal, for example, to deport an illegal alien.

So, sure. A judge may "throw out" the case against Comey. But the dismissal will be appealed and the prosecution will win the appeal. Mainly because factually, Comey certainly lied under oath and to congress. Higher courts take a dim view of lying under oath.

The terrible part is that even if somehow Comey is guilty, he will experience the adage that "the process is the punishment" first hand. That gandar sauce probably won't taste as good to Comey as when he was feeding it to the goose.

Factually, Comey didn't lie....and this was already determined by an extensive Inspector General office investigation.
---------------

Because the Supreme Court has held prosecutorial vindictiveness to constitute a violation of a defendant's right to due process, where a defendant succeeds on a claim of vindictiveness, his or her conviction will ordinarily be set aside. This remedy controls even where the conviction "was entered pursuant to a counseled plea of guilty."<a href="Prosecutorial vindictiveness - Wikipedia"><span>[</span>3<span>]</span></a>


In jurisprudence, selective prosecution is a procedural defense in which defendants argue that they should not be held criminally liable for breaking the law because the criminal justice system discriminated against them by choosing to prosecute. In claims of selective prosecution, defendants essentially argue that it is irrelevant whether they are guilty of violating a law, but that the fact of being prosecuted is based upon forbidden reasons. Such a claim might, for example, entail an argument that persons of different age, race, religion, sex, gender, or political alignment, were engaged in the same illegal acts for which the defendant is being tried yet were not prosecuted, and that the defendant is being prosecuted specifically because of a bias as to that class.
In the United States, this defense is based upon the 14th Amendment, which stipulates, "nor shall any state deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

Barratry (/ˈbærətri/ BARR-ə-tree, from Old French barat ("deceit, trickery")) is a legal term that, at common law, described a criminal offense committed by people who are overly officious in instigating or encouraging prosecution of groundless litigation,<a href="Barratry (common law) - Wikipedia"><span>[</span>1<span>]</span></a> or who bring repeated or persistent acts of litigation for the purposes of profit or harassment.<a href="Barratry (common law) - Wikipedia"><span>[</span>2<span>]</span></a>

 

[Seymour Flops]

It means exactly what I think it means.

His lawyer, Patrick Fitzgerald, said he would seek to dismiss the indictment on the basis of "vindictive prosecution," meaning he will seek to show the charges were brought against Comey in retaliation for him exercising his legal rights.

https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/trumps-call-prosecute-comey-could-bolster-former-fbi-directors-defense-2025-10-10/

Well, at least the lawyer knows what to pretend in order for the motion to be plausible. Some anti-Trump judge may dismiss, but the appeals court will side with the United States and Comey will be right back on the docket. He won't get away with his crimes, if he committed crimes. If not, he has nothing to worry about.

 

[Seymour Flops]

In the opinion of the Repub US Attorney who investigated the case, and his deputy, there was not sufficient evidence to obtain a conviction.

Opinions are like assholes. Everybody has one and most of them stink.

 

[Frankenstein]

Did the "entire left wing" send out a memo? Who comprises the "entire left wing?" How do you become a member of the "entire left wing?" Can the "entire left wing" be contacted all at once?

Deflection

 

[berg80]

Well, at least the lawyer knows what to pretend in order for the motion to be plausible.

He doesn't have to pretend anything. Dotard has already spilled the beans.

 

[berg80]

Opinions are like assholes. Everybody has one and most of them stink.

Seibert's determination (and the other prosecutors in the office) is based on the evidence, or rather the lack thereof, revealed during his office's investigation.

 

[berg80]

Deflection

Your inability to answer the questions is noted.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Seibert's determination (and the other prosecutors in the office) is based on the evidence, or rather the lack thereof, revealed during his office's investigation.

Who?

 

[toobfreak]

Oooooooops. A post from the president’s account September 20 addressed to “Pam” demands “justice be served”

Oh no! How will we ever live down justice being
served against those who broke the law?!

 

[berg80]

Well, at least the lawyer knows what to pretend in order for the motion to be plausible. Some anti-Trump judge may dismiss, but the appeals court will side with the United States and Comey will be right back on the docket. He won't get away with his crimes, if he committed crimes. If not, he has nothing to worry about.

AI Overview

In his 2022 memoir, One Damn Thing After Another, former Attorney General Bill Barr confirmed that he decided not to prosecute James Comey. This decision was based on a lack of prosecutable intent, despite pressure from then-President Donald Trump.

 

[berg80]

Who?

Look it up or read post #1.

 

[berg80]

Don McGahn knows what it's like to deal with Dotard.

McGahn on Trump's pressure: I felt 'perturbed, trapped'​

Former White House lawyer Don McGahn said he felt “trapped” by former President Donald Trump’s relentless insistence that he have Special Counsel Robert Mueller ousted, according to newly released transcript of his testimony to the House Judiciary Committee.

McGahn appeared before the committee last week, after years of legal sparring over whether his testimony was required. In the hearing, he discussed his role at the White House while Trump tried to stymie Mueller’s investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election, according to the 241-page transcript published Wednesday.

In the hearing, McGahn described his feelings about the president’s directive that he order then-Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein to fire Mueller. And he said he worried — presciently — the whole situation could result in his being pulled into a congressional hearing.

After Trump pushed him to have Mueller ousted a second time during a phone call, McGahn said he didn’t feel great.

“After I got off the phone with the President, how did I feel? Oof. Frustrated, perturbed, trapped,” he told the panel of congressional investigators. “Many emotions.”

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/06/09/mcgahn-testimony-trump-pressure-492715