Fox News legal expert sees “no viable case” against James Comey

[Marener]

Yes, it does, but it would not prevent any prosecution.

Looks like Trump once tried to have his case dismissed based on vindictive prosecution.

Trump Files Motion to Dismiss for ‘Selective and Vindictive Prosecution’

Trump claims that the indictment is vindictive and that prosecutors have “behaved in an…unconstitutionally selective fashion.”

www.lawfaremedia.org

It’s a thing.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Maybe, maybe not.

I never claimed such a thing anyway.

Zincwarrior did and you jumped into rescue her as soon as she started losing.

 

[BluesLegend]

Comey likely has enough dirt on people in high places to skate free of his crimes. Now you know how Washington works.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Looks like Trump once tried to have his case dismissed based on vindictive prosecution.

Trump Files Motion to Dismiss for ‘Selective and Vindictive Prosecution’

Trump claims that the indictment is vindictive and that prosecutors have “behaved in an…unconstitutionally selective fashion.”

www.lawfaremedia.org

It’s a thing.

Oh, now you are claiming it's a thing, but calling it "vindictive prosecution," and not "malicious prosecution?"

You are as slippery as Merrick Garland and that's a compliment if your aim is to be slippery.

 

[berg80]

Joe Biden had documents that he never had had legal access to. So he must have stolen, but he was not prosecuted.

Gosh, that's absurd. Of course he had access to them since he was the VP and had a top level security clearance. The SC who was appointed to do the investigation, a Repub, found no prosecutable offense so he did something worse. He broke with DoJ protocols and made, I think intentionally, damning comments about Biden's cognitive faculties heading in to the campaign.

Did Biden refuse to comply with a subpoena? No. None was issued since he cooperated with the investigation from the start. See the difference?

 

[berg80]

Oh, now you are claiming it's a thing, but calling it "vindictive prosecution," and not "malicious prosecution?"

Vindictive prosecution is a recognized legal term.

 

[Marener]

Oh, now you are claiming it's a thing, but calling it "vindictive prosecution," and not "malicious prosecution?"

You are as slippery as Merrick Garland and that's a compliment if your aim is to be slippery.

Hey, I’m not perfect. I got the term wrong, but I got the concept 100% correct.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Gosh, that's absurd. Of course he had access to them since he was the VP and had a top level security clearance.

He had documents dating back from when he was a Senator.

The SC who was appointed to do the investigation, a Repub, found no prosecutable offense so he did something worse. He broke with DoJ protocols and made, I think intentionally, damning comments about Biden's cognitive faculties heading in to the campaign.

LoL!

Spot on comments!

Or do you think that the reason for Biden's debate performance was that he was so despondant over Hur saying that he lacked mental capacity that he came off as a person who really does lack mental capacity.

Did Biden refuse to comply with a subpoena? No. None was issued since he cooperated with the investigation from the start. See the difference?

Yes, many differences:

-Biden was warned when the search was coming.

-Biden had no authority to have classified documents in his garage, since he put them there long before he became president.

-Biden had no authority to declassify the documents he took from the Senate or the White House.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Hey, I’m not perfect. I got the term wrong, but I got the concept 100% correct.

Yes, well, you're not a perfect sock, either. But you did well as socks go. I failed to notice that you "and" Zincwarrior pulled the cheapest sock trick in the book. Zinkie made a claim that I was about to hand her her head for (rhetorically of course) and then "you" swooped in with a slightly different claim, more vague, so harder to pin down. I fell for it.

I must be slipping. That trick didn't work on me when I first saw it, probably twenty years ago on the old IMDB forums. You got me, so congrats.

But now I must put "one of you" on ignore, so as not to encourage that kind of thing.. It will have to be you, of course, because you are the obvious secondary to the primary Zinc.

Feel free to reply to this, but I'll never see it.

Buh-bye . . .

 

[Seymour Flops]

Vindictive prosecution is a recognized legal term.

Where is Zincwarrior?

 

[Nostra]

Gosh, that's absurd. Of course he had access to them since he was the VP and had a top level security clearance. The SC who was appointed to do the investigation, a Repub, found no prosecutable offense so he did something worse. He broke with DoJ protocols and made, I think intentionally, damning comments about Biden's cognitive faculties heading in to the campaign.

Did Biden refuse to comply with a subpoena? No. None was issued since he cooperated with the investigation from the start. See the difference?

A VP/Senator can only view top secret docs in a SCIF, and there is no legal way to remove them.

Biden stole them over decades. It wasn't an accident, Dumbass.

 

[Billiejeens]

I just found some good news about Fox and who runs it. Apparently Lachlan, son of Rupert is still in charge and he is not a liberal like the wives of his brothers apparently (allegedly) are. And even better news (I think) is that 3 of his siblings were ousted as being in any trust that has shares in (I believe it was) Fox News... but it is often legally called something else. In any case, maybe they were ditched because of their liberal-ness? Or am I just engaging in wishful thinking? I am not familiar with trusts and such things, but that's what I read..

Anyhow, it doesn't look like Murdoch went liberal and his conservative son is apparently still in charge. I knew Fox hadn't gone totally... um.. CNN-ish, as some have said. I guess some people just like to exaggerate to get attention or something.

Rupert is progressive
He is just a businessman that found an undeserved niche.
He supported Hillary

 

[BackAgain]

Right, just as you dont know it's true.

It was just a direct response.

Kinda shows where we are with this.

But smart money is that it's a lie.

I don’t know it’s true. That’s what trials are supposed to be for.

And the evidence presented at a trial gets tested and witnesses get to be challenged on cross-examination.

The smart money is not on your claim that the charge is a “lie.” In fact, it’s most likely to be true and that’s why it’s more probable that Comey will eventually have to take a plea deal.

 

[tahuyaman]

Comey weaponized the FBI against Hillary twice in 2016. Trumpybear was also under investigation at that time but Comey didn't revel that to the American public did he? Tell me of the weaponization during 2017 thru 2021. The House investigated Jan 6th because the Republicans in the Senate refused to support a non partisan commission like the 9-11 fact finding commission. Jack Smith wasn't appointed to fully investigate until nearly two years after Trumps Capitol Riot and attempt to fraudulently steal the EC votes from several states.

But the Neo-GOP refuses to recognize Benedict Donald's crime against the Constitution and long standing precedent makes their whines of lawfare a joke.

Idiocy.

 

[Lesh]

Huh? Still living in fantasy land? She was never elected

I meant him obviously

 

[struth]

I meant him obviously

Comey did nothing to help Trump get elected. In fact he went out of his way, violated his duties as FBI director, to protect the person running against him from criminal prosecution for stealing classified material

 

[Dekster]

That Trump fired a US attorney to get this indictment probably won't bode well for him in the eastern district of Virginia. That is the glittery left-wing right side of Virginia.

 

[Lesh]

Comey did nothing to help Trump get elected. In fact he went out of his way, violated his duties as FBI director, to protect the person running against him from criminal prosecution for stealing classified material

Bullshit. He opened an investigation just days before the election and then allowed Congress to leak that

 

[Marener]

That Trump fired a US attorney to get this indictment probably won't bode well for him in the eastern district of Virginia. That is the glittery left-wing right side of Virginia.

It shouldn’t bode well in any part of the country that doesn’t like authoritarians.

 

[struth]

Bullshit. He opened an investigation just days before the election and then allowed Congress to leak that

what are you talking about? The investigation into Clinton started well before "days before the election" and frankly, only got started due to Congressional oversight of another matter, when her illegal email server was discovered.