- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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
0
Posted on 10/24/25 at 2:41 pm to Scream4LSU
quote:
If Halligan is disqualified that simply means next man/woman up. That doesn't dismiss the indictment.
IF the motion is granted, for James, that's true. For Comey, unfortunately, these particular charges will be dismissed with prejudice (meaning they can't be brought again) because a defective indictment doesn't stop the statute of limitations from expiring.
The charges based on the September 2020 testimony of Comey would be time-barred.
This post was edited on 10/24/25 at 3:46 pm
Posted on 10/24/25 at 2:42 pm to Timeoday
Eventually the right will have to realize the justice system is two tiered.
Posted on 10/24/25 at 2:43 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
It would be egg on the face of the admin if they bumbled this easy indictment for Comey, though. Just typical Trump admin chaos.
I see it as a shot across the bow. Comey has to be worried. There is a Grand Jury setting up in January in Florida. Eventually, RICO will be used.
It Will Be GLORIOUS!!
Posted on 10/24/25 at 3:00 pm to Big4SALTbro
quote:
Eventually the right will have to realize the justice system is two tiered.
Everyone knows this.
However, elections have consequences and this payback will be glorious.
Posted on 10/24/25 at 3:54 pm to Timeoday
Judge Jamal sounds like a tv judge from BET!
Posted on 10/24/25 at 4:13 pm to IvoryBillMatt
Wouldn’t Comey refuting his claims in public statements and judicial settings throughout the last 5 years show continuity ?
Posted on 10/24/25 at 4:23 pm to Timeoday
quote:
On Friday, Judge Jamar Walker granted Letitia James’ request to consolidate her motion with Comey’s similar motion so the Clinton judge can decide whether Lindsey Halligan will be disqualified in both cases.
They are going to be referred to the chief judge of the Fourth Circuit of the US Court of Appeals for assignment to someone outside the Eastern District of Virginia.
Posted on 10/24/25 at 4:25 pm to Nosevens
quote:
Wouldn’t Comey refuting his claims in public statements and judicial settings throughout the last 5 years show continuity ?
Continuity of what?
Posted on 10/24/25 at 4:37 pm to L5ut1g3r
Posted on 10/24/25 at 4:39 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
What is the theory behind this showing the fix is in, exactly?
Posted on 10/24/25 at 4:45 pm to IvoryBillMatt
quote:
IF the motion is granted, for James, that's true. For Comey, unfortunately, these particular charges will be dismissed with prejudice (meaning they can't be brought again) because a defective indictment doesn't stop the statute of limitations from expiring.
The charges based on the September 2020 testimony of Comey would be time-barred.
It will depend on facts. Both indictments were signed by only one attorney - Halligan. Usually the U.S. attorney signs the indictments (or special prosecutor in those instances) and so does the trial attorney[s]. If they were signed by trial attorneys then it would not matter if Halligan is disqualified. That means there is a good chance both indictments could be thrown out. And as you said, that would end the Comey case due to the SOL
However, there may be an argument that other attorneys did work the indictment. For example - did other attorneys beside Halligan present the case to the Grand Jury? If so, that leaves open the possibility that both indictments are valid even if Halligan was not properly appointed.
We discussed this before - I think Halligan was properly appointed, but there is an obvious argument that she was not, so we will see.
Posted on 10/24/25 at 4:46 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
What is the theory behind this showing the fix is in, exactly?
quote:
STATIST MO FO
You're like a mentally-challenged parakeet who only knows 3 words. Same shite, over and over and OVER again.
SFP = Ground Hog's Day on steroids.
Posted on 10/24/25 at 4:47 pm to Big4SALTbro
The issue in these cases is that no U.S. Attorney and arguably no one in the U.S. Attorney's office would sign off on indicting Comey or James.
Posted on 10/24/25 at 5:00 pm to Timeoday
The two motions raise exactly the same legal issues. Considerations of judicial economy almost mandate a consolidated hearing on the merits.
Someone opined that the ramifications of a potential dismissal might vary in the two cases, but that should make no difference on the legal analysis regarding the propriety of the appointment, and thus the potential of a dismissal.
Someone opined that the ramifications of a potential dismissal might vary in the two cases, but that should make no difference on the legal analysis regarding the propriety of the appointment, and thus the potential of a dismissal.
Posted on 10/24/25 at 5:02 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:It seems clear.
What is the theory behind this showing the fix is in, exactly?
The same judge, hearing essentially the same evidence, regarding exactly the same issue ... would only consolidate the hearings if (s)he had already decided how to rule on the matter.
Very simple, really.
(EDIT: I clearly should have used my sarcasm font)
This post was edited on 10/24/25 at 5:32 pm
Posted on 10/24/25 at 5:11 pm to SlowFlowPro
stfu village idiot
Posted on 10/24/25 at 5:20 pm to RelentlessAnalysis
quote:
The same judge, hearing essentially the same evidence, regarding exactly the same issue ... would only consolidate the hearings if (s)he had already decided how to rule on the matter.
This
Anyone that says otherwise is lying to themselves and not a serious person.
Posted on 10/24/25 at 5:21 pm to Nosevens
quote:
Wouldn’t Comey refuting his claims in public statements and judicial settings throughout the last 5 years show continuity ?
It’s not a conspiracy charge. With conspiracy, the SOL runs in the last overt act. For Comey, the alleged false statement occurred in 2017 but was reaffirmed in Congressional testimony in 2030. If the government proved that he reaffirmed that statement the statute of limitations for perjury is marked from the date of the testimony to Congress not any later statement to anyone else. There isn’t “continuing perjury”. Any new perjury statement would be a new charge
Thus, If he lied in court since the Congressional testimony, it’s a new offense and new limitations period. Those aren’t part of this indictment. I haven’t heard of any alleged perjurious court testimony though.
Page 2 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News