- 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: Former FBI Director James Comey indicted
Posted on 9/26/25 at 4:30 pm to Major Dutch Schaefer
Posted on 9/26/25 at 4:30 pm to Major Dutch Schaefer
quote:
Former FBI Director James Comey indicted
0
Posted on 9/26/25 at 4:59 pm to AUstar
quote:
Remember they had to convince a grand jury in northern Virginia. Not an easy task when it comes to a Democrat.
I wonder if there could still be other charges once the other investigations roll through, if these were just the ones where SOL was running out.
Posted on 9/26/25 at 5:15 pm to The1TrueTiger
quote:
he point blank said that the case should be thrown out.
Um not quite…the opposite in fact.
Most have said this is a slam dunk case. The ones that haven’t are crying about weaponization of the DOJ.
They have mountains of proof…including his own words and memos. This isn’t breaking news.
The grand jury in this case was constructed from one of the most liberal areas of the country. The judge is a Biden appointee so we’ll see how it goes but you cannot just ignore the evidence.
This post was edited on 9/26/25 at 5:17 pm
Posted on 9/26/25 at 6:27 pm to AUWDE
I have spent way too much time looking into this, but I have seen enough. This prosecution of Comey is going to fail.
Russiagate was a horrible hoax. People should be hanged for it.
This indictment of Comey has nothing to do with that. It is about whether or not Comey authorized McCabe to leak the Clinton emails story to the Wall Street Journal. Even according to McCabe, Comey didn't "authorize" that leak: he approved of it AFTER it happened.
I wish they had indicted Comey for any of his many crimes. This indictment won't result in a conviction for anything...much less for Russiagate.
This Fox legal analyst (who wrote an entire book on how horrible the RussiaGate hoax was) nailed it:
"I don't think there's a case," Fox News contributor Andrew McCarthy said on "Mornings with Maria" Friday. "The Russiagate stuff, I'm as big a critic of that probably as there is. I wrote a book about it. I think it was a disgrace and history will remember it that way. This indictment is not about that."
Fox News Article: Comey Case Should be Thrown Out
Russiagate was a horrible hoax. People should be hanged for it.
This indictment of Comey has nothing to do with that. It is about whether or not Comey authorized McCabe to leak the Clinton emails story to the Wall Street Journal. Even according to McCabe, Comey didn't "authorize" that leak: he approved of it AFTER it happened.
I wish they had indicted Comey for any of his many crimes. This indictment won't result in a conviction for anything...much less for Russiagate.
This Fox legal analyst (who wrote an entire book on how horrible the RussiaGate hoax was) nailed it:
"I don't think there's a case," Fox News contributor Andrew McCarthy said on "Mornings with Maria" Friday. "The Russiagate stuff, I'm as big a critic of that probably as there is. I wrote a book about it. I think it was a disgrace and history will remember it that way. This indictment is not about that."
Fox News Article: Comey Case Should be Thrown Out
Posted on 9/26/25 at 6:43 pm to Stealth Matrix
quote:
I wonder if there could still be other charges once the other investigations roll through
Of course. Kash has said there are larger investigations
Posted on 9/26/25 at 7:01 pm to IvoryBillMatt
quote:
I have spent way too much time looking into this, but I have seen enough. This prosecution of Comey is going to fail.
Russiagate was a horrible hoax. People should be hanged for it.
This indictment of Comey has nothing to do with that. It is about whether or not Comey authorized McCabe to leak the Clinton emails story to the Wall Street Journal. Even according to McCabe, Comey didn't "authorize" that leak: he approved of it AFTER it happened.
I wish they had indicted Comey for any of his many crimes. This indictment won't result in a conviction for anything...much less for Russiagate.
This Fox legal analyst (who wrote an entire book on how horrible the RussiaGate hoax was) nailed it:
"I don't think there's a case," Fox News contributor Andrew McCarthy said on "Mornings with Maria" Friday. "The Russiagate stuff, I'm as big a critic of that probably as there is. I wrote a book about it. I think it was a disgrace and history will remember it that way. This indictment is not about that."
Fox News Article: Comey Case Should be Thrown Out
This.
That, and it's a bad sign that they fired the most qualified guy for the job to prosecute Comey, Erik Siebert, because he stated there wasn't a case. We can go with the 'he's a democrat' BS but he's not, and now Trump is saddled with Halligan, who is a damned Real Estate lawyer who has never prosecuted anyone, who's going to try to prosecute the former head of the FBI. This doesn't include the fact that officially Halligan is holding down mulitple jobs for Trump already, including the whole Smithsonian thing and some of his own personal indictments.
Everybody's happy about indicting Comey and yet nobody has looked at how it's being done. Comey's no doubt laughing at Trump's plan - hell, I would if I were him.
Posted on 9/26/25 at 7:11 pm to Leopold
Posted on 9/26/25 at 10:25 pm to Bunk Moreland
Gonna be so awesome to watch all the nobody’s above ‘muh law’ bros confuse their identity.
Posted on 9/27/25 at 1:30 am to Sid E Walker
quote:
I’ll waive any celebration until astute legal scholar SFP opines on what it all means.
Bet
Posted on 9/27/25 at 5:14 am to Bunk Moreland
More will be revealed
Posted on 9/27/25 at 5:27 am to Sho Nuff
quote:
raid his house at 4am
now do barry obama and big mike
Posted on 9/27/25 at 6:03 am to Armymann50
quote:
More will be revealed
Everything else is barred by the statute of limitations. Trump fired him in 2017. That's why they could only file such weak charges, which don't touch Comey's worst crime: RussiaGate.
This post was edited on 9/27/25 at 6:11 am
Posted on 9/27/25 at 7:53 am to Leopold
quote:
Everybody's happy about indicting Comey and yet nobody has looked at how it's being done. Comey's no doubt laughing at Trump's plan - hell, I would if I were him.
At a minimum he’s spending thousands on legal fees. There are plenty of people in Trump’s orbit that will be happy with just that, since it happened to them as well.
Posted on 9/27/25 at 8:05 am to IvoryBillMatt
The Comey indictment was brought forth by the declassification of Artic Haze.
That investigation revealed that several senior FBI officials all coordinated media leaks at Comey’s direction. Andrew McCabe, James Baker, James Rybicki, and Daniel Richman are all involved in this.
He lied, and they have proof he lied. There will be a superseding indictment coming…this was the placeholder.
That investigation revealed that several senior FBI officials all coordinated media leaks at Comey’s direction. Andrew McCabe, James Baker, James Rybicki, and Daniel Richman are all involved in this.
He lied, and they have proof he lied. There will be a superseding indictment coming…this was the placeholder.
Posted on 9/27/25 at 8:24 am to AUWDE
quote:
The Comey indictment was brought forth by the declassification of Artic Haze.
That investigation revealed that several senior FBI officials all coordinated media leaks at Comey’s direction. Andrew McCabe, James Baker, James Rybicki, and Daniel Richman are all involved in this.
He lied, and they have proof he lied. There will be a superseding indictment coming…this was the placeholder.
I hope you're right, but the indictment as it stands now is toast.
My faith in the Trump DOJ will be restored if they file that by Tuesday. Do you worry that if not, the statute of limitations will run because the superseding indictment you contemplate would substantially broaden the charges?
Posted on 9/27/25 at 8:40 am to AUWDE
quote:
He lied, and they have proof he lied. There will be a superseding indictment coming…this was the placeholder.
Again, I hope you're right, but if they have that all worked out, why file such a stupid placeholder? The McCabe leak to the WSJ about the Clinton emails investigation was thoroughly reviewed by the Office of Inspector General which exonerated Comey in that instance.
Dumb question: does the filing of this DOA indictment toll the statute of limitations regarding the Grand Jury? Can they still ask the Grand Jury for additional counts on issues that relate to something other than one lie they indicted Comey for from the September 30, 2020 hearing...even though the SOL will have run?
Thx
Posted on 9/27/25 at 1:38 pm to IvoryBillMatt
How do you know that, though?
To my knowledge, the DOJ has not released any evidence they have on the matter - all we have is an indictment.
To my knowledge, the DOJ has not released any evidence they have on the matter - all we have is an indictment.
Posted on 9/27/25 at 1:41 pm to JimEverett
Just to expand on what I mean - there is this weird idea that seems prevalent right now that an indictment has to prove the charges. That is nowhere near true. The indictment just lays out the charges.
Now if your main purpose was to alter public perception and try to hurt someone publicly, you might give details in the indictment for the media to chew on for months.
That is not what is going on here. Perhaps the DOJ has no evidence. But you cannot get that from just reading the indictment.
McCarthy knows this, that is why it is obvious he is playing political favorites when he criticizes the DOJ for bringing these charges.
Now if your main purpose was to alter public perception and try to hurt someone publicly, you might give details in the indictment for the media to chew on for months.
That is not what is going on here. Perhaps the DOJ has no evidence. But you cannot get that from just reading the indictment.
McCarthy knows this, that is why it is obvious he is playing political favorites when he criticizes the DOJ for bringing these charges.
This post was edited on 9/27/25 at 1:44 pm
Posted on 9/27/25 at 1:47 pm to IvoryBillMatt
quote:
does the filing of this DOA indictment toll the statute of limitations regarding the Grand Jury?
The statute of limitations does not apply to grand juries - only crimes. Or am I misunderstanding your qustion?
quote:
Can they still ask the Grand Jury for additional counts on issues that relate to something other than one lie they indicted Comey for from the September 30, 2020 hearing...even though the SOL will have run?
Yes, they can still go the Grand Jury for additional counts and they can indict Comey on any potential crime where the statute has not run.
Posted on 9/27/25 at 1:56 pm to JimEverett
quote:
McCarthy knows this, that is why it is obvious he is playing political favorites when he criticizes the DOJ for bringing these charges.
I made the assumption, like McCarthy did, that the leaker whom Comey allegedly authorized was McCabe, based on Cruz's questioning of Comey. THAT allegation had been thoroughly reviewed by the OIG and resolved in Comey’s favor.
IF "Person 3" is not McCabe, then I agree that they might have a good case. I hope so.
At what point does the prosecution have to inform the defense of the identities of Person 1 and Person 3?
Page 15 of 17
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News