A Comey of Errors

​Yesterday, Trump tweeted "JUSTICE FOR AMERICA!" over his DOJ indicting former FBI Director James Comey – once again showing the convicted felon, adjudicated rapist and guilty fraud's total misunderstanding of the legal process.

James Comey was merely indicted – and that only because Trump forced it, by firing the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia – Erik Siebert, appointed by Trump -- who refused to indict Comey, saying that there was no evidence of a crime and no case that could be won, after which Trump named one of his personal attorneys, Lindsey Halligan, as temporary replacement. 

And how low did Trump have to go for that, to find someone willing to prosecute a former FBI Director without enough evidence for even a Trump appointee to indict?   Lindsey Halligan is a former insurance lawyer who has never prosecuted a case – her career was generally handling disputes over property claims.  (The sole mention of her on her old firm’s website references her being part of a team that won a judgement over a leaky roof.)  She was hired by Trump as one of his personal lawyers a year after meeting the former two-time Miss Colorado participant at a golf tournament at Trump’s club.  And in the very first federal filing that Ms. Halligan ever made, District Judge Aileen Cannon (yes, the Florida judge who continually bent over backwards to twist almost every decision in Trump’s favor when he'd been indicted for mishandling national security documents) – rejected two of Halligan’s filings, going so far as to suggest that Halligan go to the court’s website for instructions on how to properly submit court documents.

(I was hesitant to reference Ms. Halligan being a beauty contestant.  That has nothing to do with her ability as a lawyer, which might be great or out of her depth.  But I put it in because I think it has everything to do with why Trump hired her.  Not just reinforced by her lack of prosecutorial, federal and criminal experience, but also because of every word out of Trump’s mouth for years about what kind of women he likes and can’t help but jump on and kiss all over, and how she looks like Attorney General Pam Bondi and Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt, and is even a doppelganger of  former Communications Director and advisor Hope Hicks -- all of which has culminated in who he was able to find willing to appease his personal angst and retribution to prosecute a former FBI Director that this own handpicked U.S. Attorney refused to go to court against for not having evidence to file a case.  Proving the old Trump adage -- Justice is blond.)

Fun Fact:  Lindsey Halligan is the person who discussed with Trump how the Smithsonian was overemphasizing slavery in the U.S., and was later put in charge of whitewashing history from the national museum.

Even more to the point of Trump's joyous shout about supposed "JUSTICE!", as should be obvious to pretty much most people 12 years old and up -- James Comey hasn’t actually been convicted of anything  For that matter, he hasn’t even had a trial yet.  In fact, rather than the “JUSTICE!” (sic) that Trump somehow thinks he just got and wants his base to to think, James Comey right now is literally considered innocent.

Furthermore, the case may not even get to trial.  As MSNBC legal reporter Ken Dilanian explained, Comey has a strong case for the federal judge to throw out the charges.  Helped, no doubt, by when his lawyers undoubtedly tell the court that the U.S. Attorney who had initially handled the case refused to bring charges because there was no evidence to do so.  And that Trump publicly tweeted to the Attorney General he wanted indictments.

How bad is the DOJ's case?  We've all heard the saying that a prosecutor can indict a ham sandwich, since there is no defense allowed in the Grand Jury room, the process is all one-sided, and only 12 of 23 votes are need to indict.  Well, as much as the headlines were that James Comey was indicted -- far-less reported is that while there were three counts presented...Lindsey Halligan failed to even get an indictment on one of them.  (No, that doesn't mean the other two counts aren't rock solid. But considering that the previous U.S. Attorney thought there was no evidence to indict at all and declined to proceed, the refusal to indict on one count seems an overwhelmingly better point of presumption.)

[UPDATE: A Grand Jury transcript has now been released showing that -- with no defense allowed and no judge in the room, just a prosecutor, who in this case was Lindsey Halligan herself -- the vote to indict was only 14 of 23.  Your reminder that conviction at trial, should this even get to trial, when there is an actual defense team, cross-examination, and a judge in the courtroom, requires a unanimous verdict.]

And none of this even takes into consideration that, with Trump posting tweet after tweet and making public comments about what a terrible, awful, evil, bad human being he believes James Comey to be and how guilty, guilty, guilty he already is, I would think Comey’s lawyers have already drafted a motion for dismissal based on Trump’s own actions that, with all of this public and coming from the president of the United States, their client could never get a fair trial.

And this is what Trump shouts out is “JUSTICE FOR AMERICA!”  James Comey merely being indicted.

He should be reminded that by this standard, there was “JUSTICE FOR AMERICA!” when Trump himself was indicted by Special Prosecutor Jack Smith.  A case that got dismissed by Judge Aileen Cannon (yes, her again), twisting yet another of her rulings that Smith’s appointment was unconstitutional because he was not confirmed by Congress.  (Smith appealed – but dropped it when Trump won his election.)

But I think it’s safe to say that no one on any political side thought there was “JUSTICE FOR AMERICA!” just because Trump was only indicted.  MAGOPs are overjoyed that Trump ended up not going to trial, and Democrats are still galled by Judge Cannon abusing her authority and seeing justice denied.

What a huge mistake this is for Trump, as he celebrates dancing on a high wire.  Unaware of how the court system works.  Unaware that this could be PR disaster for him if there is an exodus of DOJ lawyers concerned about losing their law licenses -- or self-respect.  Unaware that this could be a humiliating disaster for him if he loses or worse, if it gets thrown out of court.  And unaware that it could be a political disaster and profoundly backfire on him if the public  is aghast at a personal, egomaniacal, vindictive, fascist abuse of power vendetta criminally indicting a former FBI Director just because he was doing his job and because painfully insecure Trump can’t handle not liking anyone who acts against his wishes.

Man, if Trump was so bothered by a TV comedian that he’s willing to break the First Amendment to get him fired, one can only imagine how much roiling inner-turmoil he’s dealing with over a former FBI Director.  And with his dementia kicking into high gear, obsessively pushing him on.

Yes, I know I could be totally wrong about all this.  But if I am, then so too are almost all legal experts analyzing it on television.  And if so, there will be a ton of mea culpas going around.  But it's possible -- though that is worlds different from probable or likely.

Just a guess, but as grueling an experience as being federally indicted must be, I think James Comey knows how improbable it is he'll be convicted.  I also think, as a guess, that James Comey is thinking, “If only I hadn’t foolishly reopened that investigation of Hilary Clinton, just to give a wrong-headed and meaningless appearance of fairness, she would likely have been elected President, and Trump would be home, cheating at golf, skipping his psychiatrist’s appointment, telling the clubhouse attendants how much money he made just by running for office, eating far too many Big Macs, and braying at anyone who passed by that he should have gotten an Emmy Award.

In fairness, Trump is probably doing all that anyway.