The Trump Reprisals

[Free]

May the witch hunts begin.

Former FBI Director James Comey indicted

Former FBI Director James Comey has been indicted by a federal grand jury, an extraordinary escalation in President Donald Trump’s effort to prosecute his political enemies.

Comey, a longtime adversary of the president, is now the first senior government official to face federal charges in one of Trump’s largest grievances: the 2016 investigation into whether his first presidential campaign colluded with Russia.

“JUSTICE IN AMERICA! One of the worst human beings this Country has ever been exposed to is James Comey, the former Corrupt Head of the FBI,” Trump wrote in a Truth Social post.

Comey has been charged with giving false statements and obstruction of a congressional proceeding, and he could face up to five years in prison if convicted.

It's the filmiest of indictments, 2 charges both dealing with the same issue, where Comey told Congress in 2020 he didn't authorize anyone under him acting as an anonymous source to the media. One of Trump's personal lawyers, the new top prosecutor in the Eastern District of Virginia (good to be on Trump's payroll, huh!), brought the indictment. This is going to be shitshow, and I expect heads will eventually role over the theatrics.

Here's Comey's reaction:



(/me waves at GCF)

 

[Innula Zenovka]

I think this is free to read

The tragicomical indictment of James Comey

In a sane country this thing would be laughed out of court.

www.publicnotice.co

It makes it clear what thin stuff the indictment is.

Here’s a recent indictment in a wire and bank fraud case in the same federal district, from the same US attorney’s office. It’s 14 pages and contains a narrative about the alleged criminal behavior with topical subheadings and explanations of how the behavior violated the relevant laws. Here’s another 24-page one for securities fraud, complete with an overview of the applicable securities reporting laws.

Also,

Ryan Goodman of Just Security has a good rundown on Bluesky of the flimsy basis of the charges against Comey, which can basically be summed up as “Ted Cruz misunderstands or mischaracterizes things or both.”

Ryan Goodman (@rgoodlaw.bsky.social)

Comey's testimony in 2020 On the left: In hearing, Senator Cruz erroneously claimed McCabe had said Comey "directly authorized" leak to press. Comey denied that. On the right: Cruz was wrong. McCabe did not say Comey authorized the leak (source: Inspector General Report, on which Cruz relies)

bsky.app

 

[Free]

Trump should be thanking Comey for his first tour of the Presidency. Sure, I get all the later shit.

If this was happening in a different timeline, I might be faintly cheering it on. I cannot stand Comey and the sanctimonious front he offers up - and he offers it up well - against a number of politically-motivated actions on his part. I believe he's a decent man who's tarnished by blaring inclinations towards demonstrative self-interest.

But this indictment is a sham, driven by Trump's insane desire to burn his enemies, real or imagined. And you can't give an inch to tyrants like that.

 

[Beebo Brink]

It's the filmiest of indictments...I expect heads will eventually role over the theatrics.

I'm really impressed with your thematic typos.

 

[Veritable Quandry]

This looks like a situation where they may have been afraid that adding too much detail would have lead the Grand Jury to not indict.

 

[Free]

I'm really impressed with your thematic typos.

I'd say I try, but then it wouldn't be a typo.

 

[Free]

The indictment is (barely!) 2 pages long.

If this was at all on the table when Erik Siebert resigned (or got fired - Trump argues this point), I can see why he balked at bringing a case against Comey. (And the efforts to bring one against Attorney General Letitia James is obvious bullshit.)

The counts are:

1. False statements within the jurisdiction of the legislative branch of the United States Government. (That would be Congress)
2. Obstruction of a Congressional Proceeding.

That's it. And #1 is an exaggeration, since it's a single statement brought up in the indictment.

This all happened in Congress, before the Congressional Judiciary Committee. And that means a hell of a lot of Congressional statements made by members of Trump's administration need to be combed through.

 

[Veritable Quandry]

It turns out they only have 2 days before the statute of limitations runs out, which is another reason for the sloppy work.

 

[Free]

It turns out they only have 2 days before the statute of limitations runs out, which is another reason for the sloppy work.

I think it expired today, so actually it was just one day. By the skin of their teeth!

EDIT: Nope, his testimony took place on Sept. 30, 2020. So, Tuesday was the last day. They got an extra weekend in!

 

[Katheryne Helendale]

I can't wait til the discovery phase of that trial!

 

[Veritable Quandry]

Let's see if the indictment survives early motions. Remember that the insurance attorney handling the case blew two filings for not meeting legal requirements by Judge "I blow cheetos" Cannon.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/judge-james-comey-indictment-confusion-trump/?intcid=CNM-00-10abd1h

 

[Noodles]

Trump should be thanking Comey for his first tour of the Presidency. Sure, I get all the later shit.

If this was happening in a different timeline, I might be faintly cheering it on. I cannot stand Comey and the sanctimonious front he offers up - and he offers it up well - against a number of politically-motivated actions on his part. I believe he's a decent man who's tarnished by blaring inclinations towards demonstrative self-interest.

But this indictment is a sham, driven by Trump's insane desire to burn his enemies, real or imagined. And you can't give an inch to tyrants like that.

There actually a fair amount of stuff that they are pushing that feels like this. Stuff that actually kind of has "admirable goals."

But its done in the most "burn everything and everyone withing 100 miles with a flame thrower to deal with this one small weed patch" mentality behind it.

 

[Free]

There actually a fair amount of stuff that they are pushing that feels like this. Stuff that actually kind of has "admirable goals."

Uhhhhhhhhh, can you name three?

 

[Noodles]

Uhhhhhhhhh, can you name three?

"Encouraging US Jobs over foreign jobs." But not through this stuid tariff yoyo bull shit and anti-imigrant fear momgering.

"Make America Healthy Again". But not with crachpot nonsense miracle cures all carried along for the ride.

"Optimise and better streamline Government systems." But not by firing and rehiring people for stupid reasons other than letting your techno libertarian friends steal all our data.

 

[Free]

Quite a reach to collect their efforts to smash everything as "admirable goals," but I'll score you up.

 

[Soen Eber]

https://www.thetravel.com/us-airport-pre-clearance-for-canadians-threatened-to-be-abolished-first-time-since-1952/

Of course, the perfect way to drive Canadian visits to the United States is to make it harder for Canadians to visit. Or perhaps it is intended to make Canadian visitors subject to American laws at American airports where the laws change with Trump's mood. With pre-clearance in Canada visitors can just shake their head and walk away instead of finding themselves in arbitrary detention for refusing to share their social media.

 

[Free]

https://www.thetravel.com/us-airport-pre-clearance-for-canadians-threatened-to-be-abolished-first-time-since-1952/

Your link doesn't go anywhere. (Thankfully the URL shows up, though.)

U.S. Pre-Clearance For Canadians Threatened To Be Abolished For The First Time Since 1952

The U.S. is pushing back on decreased arrivals from Canadians.

www.thetravel.com

 

[Innula Zenovka]

Your link doesn't go anywhere. (Thankfully the URL shows up, though.)

U.S. Pre-Clearance For Canadians Threatened To Be Abolished For The First Time Since 1952

The U.S. is pushing back on decreased arrivals from Canadians.

www.thetravel.com

If I properly understand Ambassador Hoekstra's argument, the US may consider ceasing to offer airport pre-clearance because the number of Canadians visiting the US has fallen, thus making the service appear more expensive to run per capita (though the fixed costs of offering the service remain the same, of course).

To remedy this, the US proposes to make it more difficult and time-consuming for Canadians to visit the US, and increase congestion at US airports, by cutting back on the service.

Penny-wise, pound-foolish, to my mind. But then I've never gone bankrupt running a casino, so what do I know?

 

[Noodles]

Quite a reach to collect their efforts to smash everything as "admirable goals," but I'll score you up.

Thats kind of what I am getting at. There are ways to push some of these "idealistic MAGA" points WITHOUT also smashing everything.

But when you (they) are a bigoted asshole, every problem looks like a race/diversity/religous issue.

 

[Innula Zenovka]

Thats kind of what I am getting at. There are ways to push some of these "idealistic MAGA" points WITHOUT also smashing everything.

But when you (they) are a bigoted asshole, every problem looks like a race/diversity/religous issue.

Isn't the point of populism that it offers deceptively simple solutions to complex problems? It's ideally suited to social media, because algorithms promote snappy and contentious takes on hot-button issues, and reward their authors for producing them.

We're seeing the results of this in England at the moment, where Nigel Farage's Reform Party did very well in the local elections earlier in the year and are finding out the hard way that running local government and delivering services is considerably more complex and difficult than is shouting about cutting out waste (an idea that, of course, had never previously occurred to anyone over the previous 14 years of trying to manage with ever decreasing financial support from central government) and worrying about Pride flags.

Unfortunately, local residents, even those who didn't vote for them, are having to find this out too.