politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
There was no true bill returned by the grand jury, and nobody in charge with legitimate authority to bring an indictment anyway, so that's two reasons that there was no indictment. So in the case of Comey, since the statute of limitations was two days from expiring when the non-charges were brought, DOJ is shit out of luck.
They'll probably take another run at Tish James, though.
That's probably accurate that there wasn't a true bill, but it's one of those things that I don't think has actually been tested.
The specific circumstances where the foreman signed off on the second indictment with 2 charges instead of 3 without the rest of the grand jury suing the exact bill is really weird. But if it weren't for the statue of limitations it would be an easy remedy - just take it back to the grand jury.
And if it were a different technical error, there's a 6- month period after the SoL in which an indictment that's thrown out of techical grounds can be corrected.
But the combination of the 2 is unprecedented as far as I know, and there's a legitimate legal question as to whether it's a bad indictment that should be thrown on on technical grounds (giving 6 months to re-file) or if it simply wasn't an indictment at all.
And now with the whole thing being thrown out because Halligan isn't actually a US Attorney, it's even more confusing - especially when it comes to prosecutorial misconduct she may not have committed since she wasn't actually a prosecutor.
It's a fascinating train-wreck.
I am still confused why the judge didn't clarify the matter. They said to roll back the situation to before the effort was made, but if we take that literally, then basic math says Comey is safe now, and if he is, then his dismissal was effectively with prejudice.