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.

  • mkwt@lemmy.worldOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    31
    ·
    8 hours ago

    UPDATE: As the deadline expired today, the prosecution dropped this motion which discloses that they searched an attorney’s phone with a warrant.

    Because the stuff on this phone is a landmine of attorney-client privilege, they contend, there must be a complicated and lengthy clean room-style process to sort the privileged stuff from non-privileged.

    Comey disagrees and wants to challenge the search warrant first.

    I strongly suspect they didn’t actually turn over much of anything today, but we shall see.

  • Devolution@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    5 hours ago

    It’s not about a conviction or actual prosecution. It’s about tiny dick wanting others to be more “prosecuted” than him.

  • Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    82
    ·
    11 hours ago

    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.

    • crusa187@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      10 hours ago

      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.

    • Triumph@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      11 hours ago

      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.)

      • Optional@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        11 hours ago

        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.

      • mkwt@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        11 hours ago

        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.

        • grue@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          7 hours ago

          In many jurisdictions, courts will allow prosecutors to “remedy” slipups to some degree by delaying the trial date

          How does that not immediately result in dismissal every single time, due to violating the defendant’s right to a speedy trial?

  • Archangel1313@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    37
    ·
    11 hours ago

    Oh, man…they don’t even realize that all this does is open them ALL up to the same kind of prosecution, the instant there is an opportunity. We all know that both Kash Parel and Pam Bondi have lied during their committee testimonies. Now, it’s a matter of precedent that they face criminal prosecutions for it.

    • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      29
      ·
      10 hours ago

      I fully believe that this is an attempt to proactively delegitimize any attempts to prosecute former Trump officials for their actual crimes. You can just hear the dipshit chorus of “You protested when we prosecuted Comey and James, and now you’re trying to do the exact same thing to us!”

      • Archangel1313@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        9 hours ago

        Except they’re not really protesting against this, though. If they want to make asses of themselves in court, who cares? Everyone knows the evidence will clear both of them…so, let it go to trial.

        Then, once there’s someone in charge that has some actual integrity…just return the favor. The only difference will be the fact that pretty much everyone in the current administration has committed actual crimes in Trump’s name. These fucks are all setting themselves up for prison, just by following Trump’s orders.

        • ristoril_zip@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          7 hours ago

          a lot of them probably expect pardons, but are delusional enough to ignore how badly Trump treats most of his toadies…

        • null_dot@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          9 hours ago

          I have less than no faith that American courts can deliver justice. Like they’re unashamedly corrupt and follow party lines.

          Its just not possible for an American court to convict a republican for their crimes.

    • atomicbocks@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      9 hours ago

      If you are asking for real; Each side of the case has to give the other side access to what they plan to use as evidence during the case, as well as other documents that may be requested and deemed relevant by the court. This process is called ‘discovery’. The ‘material’ would be the physical data (digital or otherwise) being handed over.

      • Triumph@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        9 hours ago

        The whole thing being enclosed in quotes was supposed to imply that that’s what they’d be asking. Because they are incompetent.

  • frustrated_phagocytosis@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    11 hours ago

    The case was right up against the statute of limitations deadline and they still don’t have the evidence ready? You’d think they’d have hurried the fuck up with that once the grand jury gave the go-ahead to whatever it is they presented.

    • Optional@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      11 hours ago

      Ohhhhh - oh no. No, no, you’re thinking of competent professionals.

      Ha ha. No. No, we passed that a while ago.

    • tazeycrazy@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      10 hours ago

      I think it’s one women trying to prove something to daddy Trump. No other lawer whants to touch this hot garbage as it will be the end of there legal career.

  • CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    edit-2
    10 hours ago

    This is just about Taco’s stupid revenge fantasies because he’s a gigantic baby. I could see him going after every person who ever said he has small hands.

    For his retarded base, it’s also about trying to own anyone not on their team. Even if Comey wins, he still had to deal with this threat. His idiot cult fanbase doesn’t want any dissent at all. What they REALLY want is a permission structure that lets them do whatever they want to any liberal they come across in their lives - if they have a mouthy woman or an uppity POC in their lives? They can say whatever they want to them, possibly carry out violence on them. Same with any “blue hair” people that bother them. People with too many face piercings. A liberal that makes them look stupid - they want to be able to deck them with no recourse. They don’t want anyone calling them fascists, either. And they want television and media to reflect only their opinions back at them, and only “good values”, meaning, right wing cishet white xtian males centered in all things…

    If you don’t believe me, pay attention to some of the things they have said after his first “win” and then this one - many seem genuinely puzzled that Democrats and liberals are allowed any agency at all, because after all “trump won”. Everyone was supposed to just shut up and accept whatever Taco and the Confederates say, because that’s how democracy works, right? We elected a king? Why isn’t Hollywood having their executives frog-marched out, and all the “woke” movies and TV deleted and off streaming/off the air? Why do I still see CNN on my cable TV? Why are these liberals even still talking?

    Things like this build towards that sick and twisted desire of theirs.

  • Corelli_III@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    11 hours ago

    Why do they think anyone cares about this guy? Why do they care about this guy? I guess it is all good as long as this loser draws their flack, that’s less attention they can direct towards us.

    • bigfondue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      11 hours ago

      Trust me, other people in the government do care. This is not just punishment for Comey; it’s a message meant for everyone else that if they criticize Trump, they’ll be prosecuted.

    • mkwt@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      11 hours ago

      I care about the guy now. Because I care about the rule of law. I want real trials in my country, where defendants confront the evidence against them fairly. Not show trials and Col. Cathcart “we can’t tell you who Person 3 is” bullshit.

      • Corelli_III@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        10 hours ago

        oh see because of my basic understanding of my position in the world, i understand that the law has never applied for my benefit and that the people who think they’re in charge are all united against us

    • Optional@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 hours ago

      Do you not know the whole thing for reals? It was kind of a big thing at the time.

      Of course, back then nickels had pictures of bees on ‘em. “Gimme five bees for a quarter,” you’d say.