Trump admin seek indictment of James Comey (Update Comey indicted, indictment dismissed, now new indictment)

Users who are viewing this thread

    superchuck500

    U.S. Blues
    Joined
    Mar 26, 2019
    Messages
    7,887
    Reaction score
    19,296
    Location
    Charleston, SC
    Offline



    This, of course, comes after the previous US Attorney in EDVA Eric Seibert resigned because he didn't think he could sign off on charges against Comey or Letitia James. The new interim US Attorney - who has no relevant background whatsoever and made her name with Trump by doing a review of Smithsonian exhibits that were contrary to MAGA viewpoints - clearly will file charges.

    1758742886384.png


     
    I question the legitimacy of these Grand Juries. Both James and Comey were indicted on fabricated evidence that will be easily tossed before an actual trial takes place.
    You know the old saying. You can indict a ham sandwhich. Grand juries only hear one side of the story.
     
    You know the old saying. You can indict a ham sandwhich. Grand juries only hear one side of the story.
    Yup, that is true. They are given enough information to determine if an indictment can be passed. I served on one. It was very interesting. I would definitely do it again.
     


    So an Agent ( Agent 2 ) told Agent 3 and FBI attorney that Agent 3 may have reviewed/obtained evidence that was possibly "Attorney-Client privilege" and instead of recusing from testifying went on and testified to the Grand Jury.

    This whole administration on down operates on "its easier to ask for forgiveness than it is for permission" doctrine.
     
    So an Agent ( Agent 2 ) told Agent 3 and FBI attorney that Agent 3 may have reviewed/obtained evidence that was possibly "Attorney-Client privilege" and instead of recusing from testifying went on and testified to the Grand Jury.

    This whole administration on down operates on "its easier to ask for forgiveness than it is for permission" doctrine.
    I'd call it more defiance than asking for forgiveness

    "Yeah, we did it, what of it?!"
     
    So an Agent ( Agent 2 ) told Agent 3 and FBI attorney that Agent 3 may have reviewed/obtained evidence that was possibly "Attorney-Client privilege" and instead of recusing from testifying went on and testified to the Grand Jury.

    This whole administration on down operates on "its easier to ask for forgiveness than it is for permission" doctrine.

    I'd say the "What're you gonna do about it?" doctrine. Screw forgiveness.
     

    Create an account or login to comment

    You must be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create account

    Create an account on our community. It's easy!

    Log in

    Already have an account? Log in here.

    General News Feed

    Fact Checkers News Feed

    Back
    Top Bottom