Below is my column in the New York Post on the indictment of James Comey. As I mentioned yesterday, the indictment seemed a bit disjointed in referring to “false statements” in the caption and the body, but only describing a single false statement. It appears that the grand jury did not return a “true bill” on one of the originally alleged false statements. That might have been the count related to Professor Daniel Richman, who appeared before the Grand Jury, but that is speculation at this point. However, as I noted, there appears to have been material removed from the original draft of the indictment.
Here is the column:
Yesterday, James Comey became the first former Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation to be indicted for a federal crime. That is likely the only fact upon which you will receive anything close to agreement in the country. For some, the two-count indictment is a long-overdue accountability for a man who pushed through the now-debunked Russian collusion investigation. For others, it is another abuse on President Donald Trump’s revenge tour.
There are legitimate concerns about the targeting of a political critic of the President, particularly after he publicly complained just days ago that Attorney General Pam Bondi was not indicting Comey and others.
However, Comey is hardly the pristine model of “ethical leadership” that he described in his book. Putting aside his critical role in the Russian collusion investigation, Comey tossed aside even the pretense of ethics after Trump fired him.
The Inspector General, Michael Horowitz, issued a scathing report that found Comey was a leaker and had violated FBI policy in his handling of FBI memos. On his way out of the Bureau, Comey stole FBI materials, including those containing the “code name and true identity” of a sensitive source.
While he did not find that he disclosed the classified information, Horowitz found that Comey took “the unauthorized disclosure of sensitive investigative information, obtained during the course of FBI employment, in order to achieve a personally desired outcome.” He further added that Comey “set a dangerous example for the over 35,000 current FBI employees—and the many thousands of more former FBI employees—who similarly have access to or knowledge of non-public information.”
Comey later admitted that he asked his friend, Columbia Law Professor Daniel Richman, to leak information from the documents to the New York Times.
Comey’s close associate, former Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, stated that Comey did instruct him to leak information to the media. Comey denied that repeatedly under oath.
James Baker, FBI general counsel and a close adviser to Comey, also told investigators that he was “under the belief” that he was “ultimately instructed and authorized to [provide information to the Times] by then FBI Director James Comey.”
That sets up a straightforward question: who is lying? It could also set up a bizarre scene of McCabe testifying against his friend. McCabe despises Trump as much as Comey, so he may prove to be an overtly hostile witness for the prosecutors.
Washington will be glued to any such trial. The only thing more unnerving than the alleged targeting of a political critic in Washington is the prosecution of a leaker. This is a city that floats on a rolling sea of leaks. The Justice Department is notorious for leaks made with lethal effect against targets. Now the former FBI director will stand trial to see if he is a leaker and a liar.
There is one individual who is likely to be watching with particular interest and perhaps satisfaction: former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn.
Comey is facing two counts of making false statements and obstructing a congressional proceeding. The first count under 18 U.S.C. 1001 (a)(2) is the exact charge that Comey engineered against Flynn.
Comey gave a book tour where he thrilled audiences about how he secured a criminal charge against Flynn for making false statements. In one event, an audience cheered as Comey took credit for the controversial charge. He explained that what he did was not exactly proper. It was, he explained,
“something we’ve, I probably wouldn’t have done or maybe gotten away with in a more organized investigation, a more organized administration…I thought, ‘It’s early enough, let’s just send a couple of guys over.’”
The actual agents who interviewed Flynn did not believe that he intentionally lied about a meeting with Russian diplomats, but Comey and his investigators pushed for charges anyway. They drained Flynn of resources, threatened to indict his son, and ultimately secured a guilty plea.
Now it will be Comey in the dock, facing a charge of making a false statement. He will do so as someone who has admitted to improperly removing FBI material and leaking information to the media.
The odds still favor Comey. He will have a jury taken from a generally liberal, Democratic jury pool. He is also a sophisticated player. Perhaps that is why he issued a videotaped message saying effectively “bring it on” and let’s go to trial.
While an improvement over Comey’s bizarre seashell messages, the videotape may be too confident. Perjury or false statements can be challenging to prove, particularly when vague or nuanced language is used. This is neither vague nor nuanced. Comey repeatedly swore that he never asked anyone at the FBI to leak information. That is either true or it is not.
Comey will continue to be vilified and lionized by different parts of the population. Yet, this is an ignoble moment that he helped bring about. Notably, this indictment comes 50 years after the only Attorney General was convicted of crimes (including false statements and obstruction). That was John Mitchell after the Watergate scandal.
Now the man who bragged about nailing Michael Flynn will face the same false statement charge. The man who celebrated the charging of Donald Trump (including obstruction-related charges) will face his own obstruction charge. Whether karma or lawfare, Comey will now have his day in court.
Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. He is the author of “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.”
Auto-Pen forgot to include this low-life in his pardon parade.
Here’s something fun to read thru! The FBI After Action Reports following Jan 6! The parts highlighted in red are particularly fun!
https://justthenews.com/sites/default/files/2025-09/FBI-HJC119-J6IG-000001-000050.pdf
“Yesterday, James Comey became the first former Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation to be indicted for a federal crime.”
….But Comey wasn’t the only one in on this scheme. Though these are only a few of the Spygate/Crossfire-Hurricane operators in addition to Comey, remember their names:
Barack Obama
Hillary Clinton / Huma Abedin-Soros
Loretta Lynch
John Podesta
Susan Rice
Aaron Zebley
Valerie Jarett
Ben Rhodes
Sally Yates
John Brennan
James Clapper
Debbie Wasserman Schultz
Andrew Weissmann
Rod Rosenstein
Robert Mueller
Andrew McCabe
Peter Strozck
Lisa page
Bruce Orr
Nellie Orr
James Baker
Alexander Vindman
Adam Schiff
….and so many more! This was truly a cabal.
And every one of the DoJ/FBI co-conspirators with Obama/Biden and their felonious Russia Dossier were Professor Turley’s fellow Washington DC bar accociation.
Nine years later and Professor Turley hasn’t noticed that yet!
Or his bar association’s Code Of Professional Conduct is just for show – doesn’t mean anything to our ethical law professor!
Hate to admit it, but yes, the Washington Bar is rife with these bedfellows, about which Turley has nothing to say. Troubling, to say the least.
The Bar’s Code of Professional Conduct has been SO compromised, for SO long, for the sake of SO many “colleagues,” that most of us here will not pay heed to the troubling discrepancy you note, in favor of any conservative wins and positivism that comes from the good professor. It is hard for us to look in the mirror, and see what we hate so much in others.
“This was truly a cabal.”
Did you notice that Mueller’s lawyers recently publicized an alleged dementia diagnosis to shield him from accountability?
Nothing new here either. They did the same thing for Biden…when he was getting our soldiers killed at Bagram/Afghanistan, there was silence; when he was a liar about stealing (and keeping) government documents, then he was a poor old man with a bad memory and prosecution was not merited…. Aside from Mueller, many of them will be shielded and excused in much the same way.
What “legitimate concerns” does Professor Turley have about the indictment of his brother Demcrat brother member of his bar association? The Profssor knows that Comey and every other fellow Democat lawyer who repeatedly perjured themselves under oath to Judge Boasberg’s FISA courts were allowed to walk on those repeated felonies and are now protected by the statute of limitations.
Comey was indicted on a continuation of his earlier felonies. It isn’t like honest investigators and prosecutors had to stretch the law and misinterpret the law as Merrick Garland did with the most minor of J6 offenders i.e. trespassing to take a selfie on the Senate lawn.
It sure would be revealing if, as a defender of the rule of law, he could list actual legitimate concerns. Rather than a belief that indicted his fellow member of their bar association looks bad to him.
Professor Turley, your party and your fellow members of your bar association will never regain credibility until you clean both your party and your fellow lawyers up.
/|\ THIS /|\
The DOJ is not going to succeed with this case. Every experienced prosecutor has pointed out there is no evidence to press charges. The fact that they could only charge two, two charges with weak evidence behind them is against a statute of limitations deadline speaks of the urgency to find anything to be able ot prosecute Comey. Pam Bondi was pressured by Trump to do something, anything to prosecute even when there is no evidence to mount a successful prosecution.
Professor Turley hedged by throwing in the “liberal” jury will obviously acquit defense.
The original prosecutor in charge resigned after an exhaustive investigatioon did not turn up enough evidence to press charges. So what did Trump do? He fired him, after he resigned. This is going to turn out into a mess for the DOJ and some lawyers will find themselves in an ethical pickle that will likely end their careers. That’s why the experienced lawyers refused to prosecute. Thankfully an inexperienced insurance lawyer “promoted” to the position is going to lead the case. Good luck.
George gives us his legal analysis. Reminding us of his earlier analysis that his favorite prosecutors would have Trump in jail before the 2024 election.
Oh… and Biden would NEVER pardon his son… and there was nothing to prove Biden was involved with his son’s sales pitches to the family’s customers from China and Russia.
“The DOJ is not going to succeed with this case. ”
Probably not – this case will most likely result in jury nullification.
But that is OK – first because the entire country will get a lesson in the fact that Jury nullification is an option.
And because it will make democrats look bad throughout the country.
“Every experienced prosecutor has pointed out there is no evidence to press charges.”
ROFL
Of course there is.
“The fact that they could only charge two, two charges”
Is just evidence that this DOJ is sticking to the law.
There is lots of misconduct by Comey that is not a crime.
Regardless, Comey was indicted by a Northern VA Grand Jury
They had to find sufficient evidence to atleast a more likely than not standard.
“with weak evidence behind them is against a statute of limitations deadline”
You had no problems gaming the statute of limitations with Trump.
Regardless, the statute of limitations clock STARTS when the last act in furtherance of the crime is committed.
Even the 2017 testimoney will get in and can be charged.
“speaks of the urgency to find anything to be able ot prosecute Comey. Pam Bondi was pressured by Trump to do something, anything to prosecute even when there is no evidence to mount a successful prosecution.”
Turley discussed the evidence above – there is more than sufficient evidence. There is more evidence than Flynn or Martha Stewart.
Would Trump like this prosecution to be successful ? My guess is even Hillary would like this prosecution to be successful – Comey’s game playing may have kept her out of an orange jump suit, but they cost her the election.
The BIG question is whether essentially a DC jury will convict – the indictment is powerful evidence that they might.
The evidence it there – easily.
The real question is the jury.
“Saint James” Comey may be loathed by Trump, but he is not loved by democrats either.
“Professor Turley hedged by throwing in the “liberal” jury will obviously acquit defense.”
They might – and if they do acquit that is what people will beleive.
But comey is not some democrat hero – like he imagines himself.
He is a two faced political operative who stabbed people in the back everywhere he went.
There are plenty on the left who will not mourn his conviction.
“The original prosecutor in charge resigned after an exhaustive investigatioon did not turn up enough evidence to press charges. ”
Turley has covered the evidence.
While we do not know what the obstruction evidence is yet – likely we will soon.
The evidence of perjure is easy to understand.
As Turley pointed out – either McCabe has lied under oath or Comey has – and there are witnesses like Baker to support McCabe. I would bet there are other records and witnesses too – but we KNOW about Comey, McCabe and Baker. Between them SOMEONE is absolutely lying under oath.
There is not a lack of evidence. All you have is the possibility the liar is McCabe and possibly Baker.
“So what did Trump do? He fired him, after he resigned.”
He refused to get an indictment on a case that OBIOUSLY was indictable as there is now an indictment.
The AUSA looks political now.
but “Russia, Russia, Russia” says the guys that infiltrated our goverment at the deepest levels yet are so inept at deep-state-stuff that we know all about their “top” secrets and “top” men.
I love how it’s been just ONE man’s patriotism that has exposed all the lies and rot in the shallow deep-state,
all the bias-for-profits yes-men in the media, and the ‘democrats’ political machine grasping for relevancy on made-up issues.
All exposed, their plans dashed, all stricken and hurting from the loss, all they have left is anguish and urges to violence.
ONE MAN caused them ALL to implode. One determined man. Your vote DOES count.
Being against America and Americans is now out-of-style! Sorry commie! America is great again!
*. Liar? Written evidence to back it up.
Comey is much more
He used his office politically against the people and constitution. He was overthrowing a government. Treason.
Comey is the residue scum one gets when scraping off the veneer of Deep State TDS still seeking to effectuate Ben Franklin’s 1787 warning.
Professor Turley says, “That sets up a straightforward question: who is lying? It could also set up a bizarre scene of McCabe testifying against his friend. McCabe despises Trump as much as Comey, so he may prove to be an overtly hostile witness for the prosecutors.”
Think about it.
Isn’t it a sad state of affairs that in this greatest of self-made countries and Flagship for the free world,
–we (along with our kids, whom we hope to raise in ethical example) will be burdened and inundated with back-and-forth speculation of Who- IN OUR NATION’S HIGHEST OFFICES,– is the real liar? the real traitor? the betraying Judas? the machiavellian and self-aggrandizing manipulator of truth? -the “other” Mephistophelian Faust (not a physician) who sold his soul for riches and power?
Whether life imitates art or art imitates life, I’d rather just watch reruns of Desperate Housewives for the same insight, inflection, and instruction. (-At least that had some humor injected in it… —there’s nothing funny about this….)
This case is going to be a disaster for the DOJ. Professor Turley gives us a little hint before he goes on to show the alleged crimes or wrongs.
Comey has plenty of evidence to prove this is a vindictive prosecution issue. Remember, multiple experienced, professional prosecutors could not find probable cause to press charges. Even Pam Bondi was not really convinced any of the charges against Comey would fly in court. Trump didn’t help the case when he very cleary demanded Comey be prosecuted just a week before the SOL.
One leading prosecutor resigned after not being able to find any evidence. This is why Professor Turley threw in the idea a “liberal” jury would not convict him as a hedge.
What will very likely happen is the poor lawyers in charge, a former Trump personal insurace lawyer, and one loyal follower will likely find themselves losing their ability to practice law.
Of course it’s going to be an uphill battle, if not a disaster, but the real reason is that we still have a hugely entrenched contingency of leftist-bureaucrats who have deeply infiltrated all avenues of government, who will work like sewer rats to relieve the legal corpus of all it’s meat.
Liberal juries failing (nullifying) to convict is not a hedge, it’s a fact of today’s (insider) leftist-infested bureaucracy.
And you’re right, those same leftist-bureaucrats will cause loss of practice-licensing because they are the original VINDICTIVES. The stubborn and giddy double impeachment of one president is PROOF of their insane and unrelenting duplicity and demand for full control.
Dianna Bec, this has nothing to do with leftist-bureaucrats. It’s more basic than that. It’s literally a lack of evidence. The accusastions and allegations are just that. There is nothing to back up their allegations and accusations. It’s all just accusatory rhetoric. Prosecutors are required to have proof beyond a reasonable doubt and a likelyhood of succees that they will win an appeal in order tp proceed with pressing charges.
The Comey case does not meet those criteria and that is why multiople lawyers including the most recent AG in charge of the case resigned. They pressured to find anything to prosecute Comey. The reality is they did not find even enough to prove probable cause. Trump didn’t care. He wants his revenge and Pam Bondi wants to accomodate Trump’s demand, but she can’t because there is no evidence to proceed. She caved to Trump’s demands despite the clear fact Comey will very likely succeed in proving this was a vindictive prosecution. Not a case based on evidence. Pam Bondi didn’t do her job. She could have told Trump “No, we can’t prosecute”. But she didn’t want to get fired. Trump will keep firing lawyers until he finds one that is willing to sacrifice his/her career to prosecute a case that will never succeed.
The flood of vindictive, useless and UN-winnable, prosecutions, as demonstrated by the Bragg/James legal-hyperboles, the Willis/Wade soap-opera, and the Jack Smith documents-hypocrisy, proved how the waste of tax-payers dollars, the demand for excessive prosecution was built and modeled by [YES!]-leftist bureaucrats…it also proved that the smearing is worth the trouble.
Hmmm. Seems none of you learned the “turnabout” lesson—Comey is a very bad actor, from waaaay back, and he deserves anything and everything coming his way, before you all get for him the political outcome you want. In the meantime, the rest of us will get a little satisfaction, democrap style.
Dr. X: Please try not to diagnose Turley’s motives with statements like, “This is why Professor Turley threw in the idea a ‘liberal’ jury would not convict him as a hedge,” or “…gives us a little hint before he goes on to show…” I am amused that you attribute Turley with such intelligence as to cleverly construct his opinions to manipulatively cause such effect, -all the while deriding him here every day as “disingenuous,” “naive,” and “failing to understand.”
Please just state your own opinion and don’t try to analyze those of others, especially your gracious host. I don’t recall anyone here retaining you as an expert. thanks
Lin, we’ve been through this before. I would have thought we had learned something by now. Professor Turley is fair game, and as a lawyer, I thought you would understand that you can read between the lines when the Professor is not making definitive claims about someone he had written about many times as corrupt or a criminal because THEY were holding President Trump accountable.
Every professional lawyer, the competent ones, knew prosecuting Comey was not feasible or possible because the evidence and claims against him are so flimsy. Trump’s demands to prosecute despite the lack of evidence even probable cause show this is entirely about revenge and a desire to punish someone out of spite. Professor Turley acknowledged as much at the beginning of his column. Trump’s DOJ has become increasingly incompetent and keeps losing experienced and competent lawyers and prosecutors.
FBI director and Kash Patel have been undermining cases with social media posts showing evidence and making claims before all the facts come out. Those actions threaten to undermine ongoing cases and potentially make the case for mistrials. The judge presiding over Luigi Mangione’s trial has warned DOJ officials to stop posting threats and claims on social media which will give Mangione the right to declare he did not get a fair trial.
We have grand juries handing out no-bills in record numbers because Trump’s AGs are too incompetent to present credible evidence.
What is telling is that Turley doesn’t mention that Pam Bondi has a duty to say “No” to the president when she knows the prosecution will not succeed. She caved to Trump’s pressure and now she has exposed lawyers to ethical conduct issues and lost their ability to practice law.
Trump has a long history of leaving lawyers hanging whenever he demands prosecutions based on conspiracy theories and a lack of evidence. A lot of lawyers found themselves in trouble during the 2020 election fraud cases.
Lin, the sad “state” of affairs we now witness, and long after the fact of democrat treachery (the Dossier and everyone connected to that malfeasance), comes so late that real justice has the appearance of “going after political opponents.”
This is not a good example for any children, especially those raised by the radical-left. And it’s not funny, on ANY level, to politically scrap over liars in government….the stunning part is that vainglorious perpetrators (fraud in fact) like Comey now get to look like persecuted patriots.
Dianna Bec: re: “real justice has the appearance of ‘going after political opponents.’”
So true.
Just this morning, ABC’s stephanopoulos (also NBC) AGAIN referred to Trump’s “retaliation and retribution campaign,” clearly intended to colour the proceedings in the minds of viewers/listeners.
But somehow Comey’s own tandem (after his 2017 firing), potentially riddled with falsehoods or fictional events starting with his anti-Trump messaging in his 2018 “A Higher Authority,”- – ->>> all the way forward to his mysterious 2025 discovery of the “8647” seashells while casually taking a morning stroll, – is not “retaliation and retribution” but is rather loftily regarded by media as “A Higher Defense,”—?
So right, lin. The leftist PLOT always thickens, from Comey’s “8647” find, orchestrated to seem like an innocent and providential message, all the way back to his piously-heady social/entertainment media blitz against trump [don’t forget the talk shows (circa 2017), on which he bragged how easy it was to isolate and fool General Flynn], who was then PROSECUTED. Comey’s party/ideology is the authority on “retaliation and retribution” campaigns, in which he was instrumental.
There truly is no “higher defense” for these amoral operatives (so many like Comey). There is only Stephanopoulos-style mainstream media grooming: “retaliation and retribution” campaigns of hypocrisies, deceptions, and endless victim-narratives for their criminal henchmen.
“back-and-forth speculation of Who- IN OUR NATION’S HIGHEST OFFICES,– is the real liar? the real traitor? the betraying Judas? the machiavellian and self-aggrandizing manipulator of truth? -the “other” Mephistophelian Faust (not a physician) who sold his soul for riches and power?”
Oh, with the possible exception of a few minor players, I think that enough verifiable information has surfaced to make the answer to those questions pretty damned clear.
Professor Turley points out that with a jury formed in D.C. it will be hard to get a conviction. The members of the grand jury that approved the indictment were picked randomly from the D.C. population. A grand jury consists of sixteen to twenty three jurors. Twelve of the jurors must concur for an indictment to proceed to trial. Even in D.C. where the ratio of Democrats to Republicans is completely lopsided the jurors decided that Comey should be indicted for his crimes. The conclusion must be that even Democrats in D.C. agreed after seeing the evidence that Comey should answer for his actions. Dear James, it’s not so bad, after you get out of the hoosegow there’ll always be a spot for you on MSNBC.
Professor, he was indicted in the Eastern District of Virginia which includes the area from Northern VA down to Richmond. Isn’t that where he will be tried and the jury pulled from, not DC?
FWIW, the OIG Report on Saint Jim:
https://www.oversight.gov/sites/default/files/documents/reports/2019-08/o1902.pdf
Anyone see floyd or dustoff this morning?
Need a good laugh.
I’m here, but not feeling well, and wearing out the carpet between my recliner and the restroom. Probably has something to do with the bag of jalapeño kettle potato chips I gorged on.
However, I shall be a brave little soldier!
I do not like Comey, and I hope bad things happen to him as a result of this. Kunstler said it well this morning:
“Jim Comey was the engine who pulled the choo-choo train of seditious fakery known as RussiaGate (Donald Trump colluding with Vladimir Putin) into America’s public life, which then expanded into the years-long ass-covering operations of the Mueller Investigation, then Impeachments One and Two, then the J-6 FBI-engineered “insurrection,” then Nancy Pelosi’s Congressional J-6 committee gong show, and then the four various fugazi prosecutions against Mr. Trump in 2024 designed to derail his re-run for office bankrupt his family, and stuff him in prison for the rest of his life.
The smuggery of this gang in the years since all this business started in 2016 has also been out of this world. Mr. Comey dropped one rancid video after another either making threats or sanctimoniously declaring his sainthood, as if he expected the dreadful day would never come that he might face charges. Likewise, former Acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe ran his mouth all over CNN for years, former CIA Director John Brennan spun fibs on MSNBC, while FBI RussiaGate straw-boss Peter Strzok rode shotgun regularly with fake news confabulator Rachel Maddow. All of it was designed to bamboozle the public, and it worked!”
https://www.kunstler.com/p/days-of-judgment
I hope this wipes the smirks off their faces. I give it a 35% chance of being successful, only because I have not yet taken my Pessimism Pill for the day,
I’ve been reading the bad news about the young women who took all the pain pills to get back at Prez Trump. Plus all the FBI agents who where at the Jan 6th.
“the bad news about the young women who took all the pain pills to get back at Prez Trump”
A cynic might alternatively categorize that as evolution in action…
I take no pleasure knowing someone is about to die, and with her baby.
Yes, this is what’s called a pre-indictment indictment to get it on the books before time ran out. More to follow in a superseding and more inclusive indictment that likely will include co-conspirators and unindicted cooperating witnesses, some no doubt from the media. The leaking, per se, was not the issue here, but why leaks were engineered and what they accomplished. The FBI under Comey groomed the Washington media and their NY cousins by feeding them tidbits of truth now and then. This set them up for the fabricated stuff they wanted their “media sources” to publish as facts, despite having none. Once published, FBI agents would use media accounts to get things like FISA warrants and Title III warrants (wiretaps), and then it was off to the races.
This technique was developed under J. Edgar himself when he encouraged agents in the deep south states who were able to get anonymous letters to the editor published, besmirching African-Americans for allegedly doing bad things. The media at the time was just too eager to publish the lies, and the stories could then be used to gin up harassment and prosecutions of black politicians and civic leaders. Comey simply revised and updated the technique to include Trump and his administration. Besides his criminal deeds, of which there are many, Comey is also a psychotic mess with a messiah complex based on the real person of his old secret Twitter name, Reinhold Niebuhr (1892-1971), a very strange and confused Christian theologian and philosopher whom an undergraduate Comey wrote about for his senior project.
On New Year’s Day, 1975, Attorney General John Mitchell was found guilty of conspiracy, perjury, and obstruction of justice for his role in the Watergate scandal. He served 19 months in federal prison. What Mitchell was accused of doing pales by comparison to Comey, who, under the color of law and in Assassins and would-be assassins his position as FBI Director, tried to take down a duly elected President of the United States and headed a group of confederates dedicated to accomplishing this evil goal. Assassins of political figures, whether using guns or words, whether successful or not, must be punished and punished severely to deter future attempts and preserve our democracy.
jjc
Very well said.
Thanks in particular for explaining this: “pre-indictment indictment,” and for exposing Comey’s utterly corrupt “technique.”
Your response was far more informative than the professor’s complaint about “legitimate concerns”.
As background, Comey’s earlier serial felonies of perjuring himself repeatedly in Judge Boasberg’s FISA courts to get spy warrants against an innocent veteran made it possible for Comey to send hundreds of agents out to deprive not just Trump but thousands of ordinary Americans of their civil rights under color of law.
Thousands of felonies made possible due to Comey’s initial felonies.
We’re apparently supposed to think that’s no big deal. It may seem so to Professor Turley and every other Democrat who wasn’t similarly targeted by Comey and his FBI.
But is a fearful thing to turn a blind eye to this “the process will be your punishment” Democrat version of rule of law.
“An Arizona Republican lawmaker on Wednesday called for the execution of a Democratic congresswoman because she urged people upset with President Donald Trump to protest in the streets.”
Fake news. We all know Republicans are angles and would never say this. This also goes agains the feelings of the whackos on this site that think only Demos call for violence.
Republicans want health care for all
Republicans would never separate parents from their kids
Republicans would never blow up a boat without knowing who was on the boat
Republicans would never take food away from starving people.
OH wait, Now it all makes sense, Republicans died in late 2016. There are no Republicans left. So yes, this all makes sense now, former Republicans, that have become fascists would definitely do this.
Anonymous, so a Republican lawmaker called for the execution of a Democratic congresswoman. I am very interested in learning more. However, seeing that you have once again not provided a source for your claim, all of us must rightly proclaim that it’s just more horse manure to add to the pile out behind the barn. Don’t you ever get tired of the smell?
Think.
Just like X/george. They post this stuff, yet never shows any links to a news service
Anon,
What’s you angle re Republican angels?
Health care for all: Barack Hussein Obama. How’s that woikin’ out in the 51st state?
Separate parents/kids: Parent’s choice.
Blow up a drug boat: 72K US fentanyl deaths 2023.
Food from starving ppl: Hamas steals the food aid from various sources, then sells it $$$ to run their war machine.
“Health care for all: Barack Hussein Obama. How’s that woikin’ out in the 51st state?”
NTM “if you like your health plan, you can keep your health plan…”
Noticed you failed to post any proof.
I am curious as to whether congress referred Comey to the DOJ for these violations during Biden’s term and the justice department ignored them? This is the same as when the DOJ was sent a referral for Holder and nothing was done. Now everyone blames Trump for retaliation when action should have already been taken.
I would say that McCabe will be a fantastic prosecution witness. He can’t say anything other than what he testified to previously, or face a perjury charge of his own. I doubt he would do that to save Comey’s skin. That’s about as easy as it gets. Besides, the obstruction of justice charge probably has a little more meat on the bone.
Obviously Mr Comey is not very popular today on this column. I don’t like him either and frankly think he is guilty but I’m not on the jury so I don’t get to vote guilty or not guilty and have to accept what the jury eventually decides. That is the way our system works and I would continue to support it irrespective of the verdict.
That’s because we cannot just march him out of his home and put him on horse and then lynch him. Because we have a constitutional system that we love and has worked for us for 250 years. If anything, I would like to see a clean trial, substantial evidence presented, hopefully see a conviction and punishment but we have to be prepared for disappointment and to accept it.
If only to show that Legal Scholar Historian from Harvard that our constitution still works. I have no doubt Prof Klarman would claim his constitutional rights in a heartbeat if he was indicted even while trashing the system he abhors.
If it is a well conducted trial with appropriate judicial rulings, solid evidence and then placed in the hands of jurors, then we win irrespective of the outcome.
In Trump’s cases I don’t think there was ever any doubt Trump would get convicted with every facet of the judicial juggernaut arrayed against him. We are better than NY, or Atlanta and the US government under Biden. That means we uphold the law fairly
I think this will cost Comey in money and prestige but there are no guarantees. I am prepared to wait and see. We don’t let the nut jobs of the Left set our agenda. We decide our Agenda and we uphold the law.
Does the system work when jury nullification is present? A venue change might help? Then there’s always jurors who vote with their gut aka inclination?
What’s the penalty for the jury that engages in nullification?
So, no penalty for juries that violate the law?
Last night I watched the debate. Had it been a drinking game you definitely would have been schlosed!! He vomited out so many distortions it was impossible to address. I had to listen to a murder mystery after to be able to go to sleep 😂! The students seemed genuinely interested in what you had to say. Great job in trying to insert some sanity into a very intense conversation .
Morning! Gotta ask Patricia Barth, why add a degree title to you legal name? Is it on your birth certificate? Do you expect, or demand, that people here or in public address you as doctor? Just asking.
You’re trolling with that user name. Or do you a actually expect everybody who greets or responds to you in public to add your middle initial and the “Jr. III” at the end of your name?
I’m guessing you’re hoping for a guest spot on Whiny Kimmel’s show.
Patricia Fudd, affirmative action doctor. Dr., could you cure my deficit of affirmative action.
The punishment is the process. I look forward to Mr. Comey having to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars of his own money for his legal defense.
Guessing George Soros would come in handy.
Someone will set up a GoFundMe page and get millions from the usual suspects. The GoFundMe for Kilmar Abrego Garcia’s has raised over $200,000
“The punishment is the process.”
Yep. In addition to the monetary cost. every bit of rancid dirt that can be dredged up from Comey’s past will be exposed to people who would never have paid any attention to it without the indictment.
Constitutional break glass moment with the indictment of Comey while ignoring the guidance of trump appointed prosecutors and essentially indicting him by social media post to his corrupt AG. And your head is up your ass Turls.