Actual things that happened in the indictment of Comey

altmin

Inconceivable Member
ZZL Supporter
Messages
3,890
the US District Attorney:
• Went to the wrong courtroom
• Stood on the wrong side of the court room when she found the correct one
• Needed the judge to explain the documents she signed on behalf of the United States


 
Last edited:

According to a transcript of the proceedings obtained by CBS News, Judge Vaala asked the newly named interim U.S. Attorney Lindsey Halligan — a former Trump personal lawyer — why there were two versions of the indictment.

A majority of the grand jury that reviewed the Comey matter voted not to charge him with one of the three counts presented by prosecutors, according to a form that was signed by the grand jury's foreperson and filed in court. He was indicted on two other counts — making false statements to Congress and obstructing a congressional proceeding — after 14 of 23 jurors voted in favor of them, the foreperson told the judge.

But two versions of the indictment were published on the case docket: one with the dropped third count, and one without. The transcript reveals why this occurred.

"So this has never happened before. I've been handed two documents that are in the Mr. Comey case that are inconsistent with one another," Vaala said to Halligan. "There seems to be a discrepancy. They're both signed by the (grand jury) foreperson."

And she noted that one document did not clearly indicate what the grand jury had decided.

"The one that says it's a failure to concur in an indictment, it doesn't say with respect to one count," Vaala said. "It looks like they failed to concur across all three counts, so I'm a little confused as to why I was handed two things with the same case number that are inconsistent."

Halligan initially responded that she hadn't seen that version of the indictment.

"So I only reviewed the one with the two counts that our office redrafted when we found out about the two — two counts that were true billed, and I signed that one. I did not see the other one. I don't know where that came from," Halligan told the judge.

Vaala responded, "You didn't see it?" And Halligan again told her, "I did not see that one."

Vaala seemed surprised: "So your office didn't prepare the indictment that they —"

Halligan then replied, "No, no, no — I — no, I prepared three counts. I only signed the one — the two-count (indictment). I don't know which one with three counts you have in your hands."

"Okay. It has your signature on it," Vaala told Halligan, who responded, "Okay. Well."
 
So I know very little about the operation of courts etc. is the implication she influenced /doctored/ or coerced the GJ to secure the indictment . Or she is just stupid and inexperienced?
 
So I know very little about the operation of courts etc. is the implication she influenced /doctored/ or coerced the GJ to secure the indictment . Or she is just stupid and inexperienced?
The head of the office refused to indict Letitita James and then resigned when he was threatened with firing, so they found someone willing to put their name on any paper and show up in any court. In this case the White House Senior Associate Staff Secretary who was also a personal Trump lawyer in some capacity.
 
The head of the office refused to indict and resigned, so they found someone willing to put their name on the paper and show up in court. In this case the White House Senior Associate Staff Secretary who was also a personal Trump lawyer in some capacity.

Some further reinforcing comments on my post last Friday in which I explained why, based on the facts as I understand them, I believe that Lindsey Halligan has not been validly appointed as United States Attorney in the Eastern District of Virginia:

1. There are two general authorities for filling a U.S. Attorney vacancy and two avenues under each authority.

One authority is section 546 of Title 28. Section 546 authorizes the Attorney General to appoint an interim U.S. Attorney for a term of 120 days. Under section 546(d), once the 120-day term expires, “the district court for such district may appoint a United States attorney to serve until the vacancy is filled.”

An individual who has been validly appointed pursuant to section 546 holds the office of U.S. Attorney, even though only on an interim basis. That individual may properly be referred to as United States Attorney or interim United States Attorney, but it would be wrong to refer to that person as acting United States Attorney.

The other authority is the Vacancies Reform Act. Under subsection 3345(a)(1) of Title 5, the first assistant in a U.S. Attorney’s office automatically becomes acting United States Attorney, unless the president exercises his authority under subsections 3345(a)(1) or (2) to direct an eligible individual to become acting United States Attorney.

2. The distinction between a United States Attorney (even on an interim basis) and an acting United States Attorney is elementary, and it reflects whether the person is exercising the authority of the office via section 546 or via the Vacancies Reform Act.

The Department of Justice meticulously recognizes the distinction. We see, for example, that it lists Alina Habba as “Acting U.S. Attorney” for the District of New Jersey. By contrast, it identifies Lindsey Halligan as “United States Attorney” for the Eastern District of Virginia. That’s also how she identified herself on the indictment of James Comey, and it’s how DOJ refers to her in its press release on the indictment.
 
The other National Review article on the matter:


There is a lot that is outrageous about the process that resulted in yesterday’s indictment of James Comey. I will focus here on what appears to be a fatal legal flaw.

As I understand the facts, it seems highly doubtful that Lindsey Halligan has been validly appointed as United States Attorney in the Eastern District of Virginia. If her appointment is invalid, so is her indictment of Comey.
 

According to a transcript of the proceedings obtained by CBS News, Judge Vaala asked the newly named interim U.S. Attorney Lindsey Halligan — a former Trump personal lawyer — why there were two versions of the indictment.

A majority of the grand jury that reviewed the Comey matter voted not to charge him with one of the three counts presented by prosecutors, according to a form that was signed by the grand jury's foreperson and filed in court. He was indicted on two other counts — making false statements to Congress and obstructing a congressional proceeding — after 14 of 23 jurors voted in favor of them, the foreperson told the judge.

But two versions of the indictment were published on the case docket: one with the dropped third count, and one without. The transcript reveals why this occurred.

"So this has never happened before. I've been handed two documents that are in the Mr. Comey case that are inconsistent with one another," Vaala said to Halligan. "There seems to be a discrepancy. They're both signed by the (grand jury) foreperson."

And she noted that one document did not clearly indicate what the grand jury had decided.

"The one that says it's a failure to concur in an indictment, it doesn't say with respect to one count," Vaala said. "It looks like they failed to concur across all three counts, so I'm a little confused as to why I was handed two things with the same case number that are inconsistent."

Halligan initially responded that she hadn't seen that version of the indictment.

"So I only reviewed the one with the two counts that our office redrafted when we found out about the two — two counts that were true billed, and I signed that one. I did not see the other one. I don't know where that came from," Halligan told the judge.

Vaala responded, "You didn't see it?" And Halligan again told her, "I did not see that one."

Vaala seemed surprised: "So your office didn't prepare the indictment that they —"

Halligan then replied, "No, no, no — I — no, I prepared three counts. I only signed the one — the two-count (indictment). I don't know which one with three counts you have in your hands."

"Okay. It has your signature on it," Vaala told Halligan, who responded, "Okay. Well."

What a fucking shit show.
 
Interim U.S. Attorney Lindsey Halligan got a grand jury to indict former FBI Director James Comey on two counts. But Halligan showed her inexperience Thursday as the jurors rejected a third charge, and she submitted the wrong documents to the judge.

It was Halligan’s fourth day on the job. She was formerly Trump’s personal lawyer, and recently led the president’s efforts to de-emphasize slavery at the Smithsonian museums.

...............

The newcomer went it alone Thursday, as MSNBC’s Ken Dilanian reports that Halligan “presented the Comey indictment all by herself to the grand jury,” a sign that she “may have a problem finding a prosecutor in office to work on the case.” The indictment was also signed only by Halligan, according to The New York Times, while “typically such filings are also endorsed by career prosecutors who have gathered the evidence in the case.”

...........

After the jury rejected that charge,
prosecutors presented U.S. Magistrate Judge Lindsey Vaala with an indictment with just the two others. But, as The Washington Post reports, Halligan accidentally “gave the judge both indictments Thursday evening, prompting confusion.”

“This has never happened before. I’ve been handed two documents ... with a discrepancy,” Vaala said
. “I’m a little confused why I was handed two things ... that were inconsistent.”


Ms. Halligan, who took over on Monday after her predecessor quit rather than prosecute James B. Comey with what he believed was insufficient evidence, had a little trouble with the first two tasks. At one point, she entered the wrong courtroom. When she found the right one, she stood on the wrong side of the judge, then appeared confused about the paperwork she just had signed.


wgn-tv chicago GIF by WGN Morning News
 
the US District Attorney:
• Went to the wrong courtroom
• Stood on the wrong side of the court room when she found the correct one
• Needed the judge to explain the documents she signed on behalf of the United States


That’s what happens when you get an insurance lawyer playing Law and Order.
 
This is pretty funny. Courts have already held that Habba and the Nevada guy were illegally appointed and thus can play no role in prosecuting cases.

That won't be a death knell for criminal prosecutions in those places because the AUSAs are untainted by the illegal appointment.

But statute of limitations has passed for Comey. So if her appointment is illegal, there's no fallback.
 
So I know very little about the operation of courts etc. is the implication she influenced /doctored/ or coerced the GJ to secure the indictment . Or she is just stupid and inexperienced?
Ill give her the benefit of the doubt and say ignorant and inexperienced, considering she's not a criminal attorney, from what I've read, and shouldn't have been placed in this position.

Now for agreeing to follow trump instead of the law, which for her the position, she's stupid.
 
This is pretty funny. Courts have already held that Habba and the Nevada guy were illegally appointed and thus can play no role in prosecuting cases.

That won't be a death knell for criminal prosecutions in those places because the AUSAs are untainted by the illegal appointment.

But statute of limitations has passed for Comey. So if her appointment is illegal, there's no fallback.
Part of me wonders if some sort of procedural boondoggle like this would be a bad outcome. I kind of think it might be important for the prosecution to fail on the merits versus something that MAGA folks can just paint as the anti-Trump machinations of an Obama-appointed judge.
 
Back
Top