- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Comey indictment misquotes Comey. Bad form for a prosecution involving what was said.
Posted on 11/17/25 at 4:24 pm to IvoryBillMatt
Posted on 11/17/25 at 4:24 pm to IvoryBillMatt
quote:
The indictment doesn't even reference prior testimony. It very specifically quotes what Comey is alleged to have said on September 30, 2020. Turns out he made no such statement on September 30, 2020. You can't convict someone for lying about something they didn't say.
Not how it works. The indictment said he was untruthful in 2020. In 2020 he said he stood by his 2017 testimony which would be understood by anyone not doing mental gymnastics to mean that his 2017 statement was truthful.
1
Posted on 11/17/25 at 4:25 pm to Turbeauxdog
quote:
No you're ignoring things to be a feckless contrarian.
Words matter, especially in the law.
You can see the weakness in the case by how y'all have to keep adding words that were not stated in the second testimony. That's not a sign of a strong case.
Posted on 11/17/25 at 4:25 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
Instead, he stood by his previous testimony as "truth"
Why didn't the indictment allege that? Instead the indictment itself was a lie.
Posted on 11/17/25 at 4:25 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
Wow!
Don't do the dishonest framing thing.
quote:
Not on that level. That gets into a very detailed discussion about the nature of his friend's relationship with the FBI (you can see the Orweillian language usage by Trump's barking dogs to see their fear over the issue if you want to look into it further).
Posted on 11/17/25 at 4:26 pm to Turbeauxdog
quote:
Yes.
Where did he use the word "true"?
Posted on 11/17/25 at 4:28 pm to BBONDS25
quote:
Not how it works. The indictment said he was untruthful in 2020. In 2020 he said he stood by his 2017 testimony which would be understood by anyone not doing mental gymnastics to mean that his 2017 statement was truthful.
They should have quoted what he actually said in 2020. Instead they put in quotes something he clearly did NOT say in 2020.
Posted on 11/17/25 at 4:28 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Was his statement in 2022 untruthful on its own? That he stands by his previous testimony?
Yes.
Posted on 11/17/25 at 4:29 pm to BBONDS25
quote:
Yes.
So he doesn't stand by the previous testimony?
Posted on 11/17/25 at 4:29 pm to IvoryBillMatt
quote:
They should have quoted what he actually said in 2020. Instead they put in quotes something he clearly did NOT say in 2020.
Not required in the indictment. Even though what he did say In 2020 is sufficient.
This post was edited on 11/17/25 at 4:30 pm
Posted on 11/17/25 at 4:32 pm to BBONDS25
quote:
Said no litigator ever. So strange that you pretend to be an attorney on here. Why?
This is such a weird attack. This is an opinion board.
In real life, I reached a point where I said to clients "Here's the law. Here are the facts. This should be the outcome. But, you never know what a judge will do." I have much greater faith in juries.
Posted on 11/17/25 at 4:32 pm to IvoryBillMatt
Of course your post is spot on.......but get ready for some folks to respond to your facts with a steady stream of insults.
Posted on 11/17/25 at 4:35 pm to Bama Mountain
quote:
Of course your post is spot on.......but get ready for some folks to respond to your facts with a steady stream of insults.
Thanks. I have to admit, I thought most people would see what the DOJ quoted and be shocked to find that Comey never said those words on that day.
The average posting on PoliBoard has better proofreading than the indictment.
Posted on 11/17/25 at 4:37 pm to IvoryBillMatt
quote:
I thought most people would see what the DOJ quoted and be shocked to find that Comey never said those words on that day.
I still don't know why they couldn't amend to fix that, if it was an issue. THAT seems fixable.
Posted on 11/17/25 at 4:40 pm to BBONDS25
quote:
Not required in the indictment. Even though what he did say In 2020 is sufficient.
The indictment is supposed to put you on notice of the crime you are alleged to have committed. That's why the Trump criminal indictment in New York should have been dismissed...which predicate act?
Here, Comey was accused of misleading Congress by saying something he unequivocally did NOT say on 9/30/20.
Posted on 11/17/25 at 4:40 pm to BBONDS25
quote:
Not required in the indictment.
Possibly. I would lean towards true.
But - you cannot put something factually incorrect in the indictment. The indictment quotes Comey saying he said this in 2020 - when he did not, right?
Posted on 11/17/25 at 4:43 pm to IvoryBillMatt
quote:
Thanks. I have to admit, I thought most people would see what the DOJ quoted and be shocked to find that Comey never said those words on that day.
The average posting on PoliBoard has better proofreading than the indictment.
And Comey's statement is literally true. A literally true statement cannot be a perjury.
Posted on 11/17/25 at 4:43 pm to IvoryBillMatt
He is referring to prior testimony, which means that testimony is now scrutable, and probably applicable for perjury considerations
Posted on 11/17/25 at 4:49 pm to Turbeauxdog
quote:
and you're saying that's not perjury?
Not sure OP understands the meaning of perjury
Posted on 11/17/25 at 4:50 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
I still don't know why they couldn't amend to fix that, if it was an issue. THAT seems fixable.
With the lack of attention to detail in this prosecution, maybe the defense didn't want to raise it before trial. Can you imagine THAT cross-examination:)????
"The government swore that Mr. Comey said on 9/30/20 X. Please point to that portion of the transcript where Mr. Comey said X."
Followed by, "Your Honor, Mr. Comey moves for a Directed Verdict."
Posted on 11/17/25 at 4:51 pm to SlowFlowPro
Yeah - they can file to amend the doc for an error, right? There is chance that would be allowed - especially if it is the same charge and same set of facts, even if SOL has run out.
The whole thing seems destined to fail though.
The whole thing seems destined to fail though.
Page 4 of 13
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News