Over the weekend, Judge Nachmanoff made it clear that a large amount of discovery material is to be delivered to James Comey today. The prosecution team from North Carolina seem to be engaging in a series of stall tactics to delay this.
The eastern district of Virginia is known informally as the “rocket docket” because of its fast resolution times for cases.
This is just evidence that this case is 100% retribution. They scrapped together a case before the 5 year, Sept 2025, statute of limitations kicked in. But they don’t actually have a case ready to prosecute. They’re stalling to come up with something, anything, coherent to prosecute.
But they have the concept of a case. They’ll tell ya.
They just waste time and money in the courts to serve as red meat for the base. See Trump’s 0-61 record litigating “the big steal.” No evidence at all, and justly thrown out of court during discovery every single time they tried it because of it.
Let’s say the prosecution does pony up a bunch of discovery material. Once that’s done, if the prosecution wants to introduce new things to base their case on, wouldn’t any of those additional pieces of discovery have to be newly acquired information, and not information the prosecution already had, but just didn’t draw a line to yet?
Wouldn’t that be the legal safeguard against this kind of retributive indictment? (Provided it’s actually enforced, of course.)
That’s my understanding, yeah. In theory, when the state demands to take away your liberty or your life they need to have what legal experts call “a case”. Sounds like trump’s Insurance Lawyer Illustrated prosecutor might be in a bit of a binder here.
In many jurisdictions, courts will allow prosecutors to “remedy” slipups to some degree by delaying the trial date, allowing the defense the same time they would have had to prepare, or at least an adequate time.
It definitely seems like that is not going to happen in this district.
There’s a bunch of complicated case law about missed disclosures and late disclosures.
How does that not immediately result in dismissal every single time, due to violating the defendant’s right to a speedy trial?