The standard DOJ use when deciding to proceed with a prosecution like this (or decline) isn’t “did Comey break the law?”
(which he did)
The standard is: “can I *prove* Comey broke the law *beyond a reasonable doubt* to the satisfaction of a jury?”
& DOJ didn’t think they could
Proving beyond a reasonable doubt would be difficult, because Comey was very clever in doing the leaking and attacking Trump:
—He didn’t leak all the memos
—He didn’t give the memos to the press but selectively had some of their contents read out by his “lawyers”
Comey also didn’t leak certain contents of the memos that remain secret to this day - e.g. whether Flynn was under a FISA, Trump’s calls with Putin etc
These are still redacted by the FBI and we don’t know their content
To a judge/jury that would show Comey was being selective
Also the classified memo was *retrospectively* classified by the FBI after Comey had already leaked it
His defense here would be that he didn’t know it was classified at the time
Comey can also say he himself classified some memos at SECRET level - and *didn’t* leak them
The law Comey broke doesn’t *require* any intent, but does require “gross negligence”
Comey would quite easily be able to argue that *at worst* he was negligent, but not grossly because he did protect some content of the memos he leaked, didn’t leak entire memos and they weren’t classified at the time (and where he should have classified them he attempted to)
Now I personally don’t agree with any of those defenses, but that’s irrelevant. Comey’s defense team would have a decent shot at introducing *reasonable doubt*, endangering the success of a prosecution. Prosecutors want the thing watertight up front
Disappointing but to end on a positive - that the IG referred Comey for potential criminal prosecution is a good sign
AG Barr/DOJ declining is only a good sign if they’re saving their ammunition for more a more watertight case involving Comey.
That, we’ll have to see...
/ENDS
Thanks to @dbongino for the shout out and discussion about why he would have proceeded with a prosecution anyway - as a means to pressure and “flip” Comey. See his show today for more:
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Special Counsel John Durham has now alleged in a federal indictment that Clinton paid shill Steele’s primary and only real “source” *fabricated* that Trump, Carter Page and Paul Manafort were involved in a “well-developed conspiracy of cooperation” with Russia
THREAD
The FBI literally cut and pasted that exact wording of a “well-developed conspiracy” into a FISA warrant and multiple renewals
(Including one signed off after Robert Mueller took over)
The FBI then redacted the “well-developed conspiracy of cooperation” wording from the FISAs when they were released. Because by this time, they’d interviewed Steele’s “source” & *knew he was lying*. And wanted to protect the lie they’d sworn to in a secret court. Let that sink in
Question for Weigel: would it be better or worse for Biden if multiple right leaning outlets published allegations *anonymously sourced* to the Biden laptop & emails (with occasional direct excerpts) or if the whole hard drive was provided so everyone could decide for themselves?
The answer for Weigel: it would be worse for Biden, just as it was for Trump. Except the difference in this case is the Biden laptop and stories are true, and the Steele dossier was false, bought & paid for by Clinton to push her scheme to falsely tie Trump to Russia to distract
One of these guys did a “monograph focusing on the representation of female characters within status competition and the economy of prestige that obtains within the fictive aristocratic courts of Middle High German narrative” and didn’t even work at Notre Dame while ACB did
“On the obstruction of justice, Mueller declined to make a determination because of a long-standing Justice Department policy that sitting president cannot be indicted”
“the special counsel shied away from subpoenaing Don Trump Jr. to testify about his notorious June 2016 meeting in Trump Tower”
This is ridiculous as well
The reason Don Trump Jr. wasn’t subpoenaed is that the FBI interviewed the key participants who all backed up Don’s account
“Team M also came close to establishing a conspiracy between the Trump campaign and the Russian government. On August 2, 2016, Manafort dined in New York City with Konstantin Kilimnik”
Kilimnik = Collusion again? Kilimnick was an Obama State dept source!
A total of 61 SCOTUS justices have been nominated and confirmed to the Supreme Court since the turn of the last century (1900)
70% of these (43 Justices) were confirmed in *under 46 days* (the amount of time remaining until the Nov 3 Presidential election)
THREAD
Nominee & days to confirm from nomination:
Lewis Powell —45
Ruth Bader Ginsburg —42
Sandra Day O'Connor —33 (*the vacancy)
Harlan Stone —31
Wiley Rutledge —28
Harry Blackmun —27 (*wrote Roe v Wade)
Arthur Goldberg —25
Robert Jackson —25
John Roberts —23 (*became Chief Justice)
Mahlon Pitney —23
John Paul Stevens —19
Sherman Minton —19
Warren Burger —17 (*became Chief Justice)
Charles Whittaker —17
Tom Clark —16
Pierce Butler —16
Harlan Stone —15 (*became Chief Justice)
William Douglas —15
Abe Fortas —14
Fred Vinson —14 (*became Chief Justice)
Considering Democrat plan to contest election regardless of the result, and potential for the legal cases to go to SCOTUS, Trump has to nominate, and McConnell has to confirm, an RBG replacement BEFORE the election
Cannot leave possibility of 4-4 decisions on election result