Pam Bondi in legal trouble...

This just in.... and shit just got real.


Judge Warns ‘Government Misconduct’ May Have Tainted James Comey Case​


- the FBI and prosecutors may have acted recklessly or willfully in ways that undermined the integrity of the proceedings....
- According to Magistrate Judge William Fitzpatrick, the DOJ engaged in a "disturbing pattern of profound investigative missteps" when it secured its indictment against the former FBI director.
- prosecutor making "fundamental misstatements of the law" to a grand jury.
- Magistrate Judge William Fitzpatrick, in his Monday filing: "The Court recognizes that the relief sought by the defense is rarely granted. However, the record points to a disturbing pattern of profound investigative missteps, missteps that led an FBI agent and a prosecutor to potentially undermine the integrity of the grand jury proceeding."

The 24-page opinion is the most blistering assessment yet by a judge of a criminal case against Comey that is already subject to multiple other challenges, ...

What's Next​

The DOJ will now have to present all grand jury materials to Comey's defense team.


------------------

Judge hints at Comey indictment dismissal, orders DOJ to release grand jury material​



...Fitzpatrick said Halligan had potentially violated court orders and Comey’s Fourth Amendment rights, which “establish a reasonable basis to question whether the government’s conduct was willful or in reckless disregard of the law.”
 
Dutch Uncle said:
Not a lawyer but seeing Pammi disbarred would be sweet justice and another shit-stain on the Trump administration.

ac6dxu.jpg
Sh
Click to expand...
She's so horrible. She deserves all the disgrace she's in.
 
the above is separate to the case being heard and detailed in the OP and how much trouble that case is headed in to.

This above is second sub case.
Cor clarity there are the 2 Main cases where if they get there, the trials will be held for each Comey and James. These two other cases are motion cases looking at aspects which may lead to dismissal before the main cases can be heard.

The judges involved are:
  • U.S. District Judge Michael Nachmanoff is presiding over the main criminal case against James Comey. He was appointed by President Joe Biden.
  • U.S. District Judge Jamar Walker is presiding over the main criminal case against Letitia James.
  • Senior U.S. District Judge Cameron McGowan Currie is a visiting judge from South Carolina who is hearing the joint legal challenge to the appointment of the prosecutor handling both cases, Lindsey Halligan. Judge Currie was assigned to the cases to avoid potential conflicts of interest for local judges who deal with the U.S. Attorney's office regularly.
  • U.S. Magistrate Judge William Fitzpatrick issued a recent order related to the Comey case, finding "profound investigative missteps" and ordering the release of grand jury materials to the defense. His findings will be considered by Judge Nachmanoff.
 
LurchAddams said:
She has literally defied her oath to The Constitution and why? Because her association with trump gives her incredible power. As long as she kisses the ring she can do whatever the fuck she wants.
Click to expand...
IMO, most of the Trump cabinet has done so. I'm not so sure about Rubio. He always looks a little guilty next to Trump. The others all lie with a straight face. Weird!
 
Dutch Uncle said:
IMO, most of the Trump cabinet has done so. I'm not so sure about Rubio. He always looks a little guilty next to Trump. The others all lie with a straight face. Weird!
Click to expand...
Rubio hopes he has the best chance to hold on to the Magat base while also appealing to old guard GOP, after Trump moves on and he hopes that puts him above Vance and others who will rely only on magats.
 
QP! said:
Rubio hopes he has the best chance to hold on to the Magat base while also appealing to old guard GOP, after Trump moves on and he hopes that puts him above Vance and others who will rely only on magats.
Click to expand...
He's probably right, at least compared to anyone else up on the stage.
 
christiefan915 said:
So true about Rubio and his facial expressions. I wonder what all his appointees really think about him, or if they worry he'll turn on them, like he did with MTG.
Click to expand...
Most are not stupid and/or greedy enough to not realize that crossing the Orange Jesus is a bad idea. Staying neutral is the best that they can hope for.

Like a blackmailer, once a staffer supports Trump then Trump will expect it even more.
 
QP! said:
i don't know as he is brown and magats are increasingly hostile to anyone not white having any power and say. even JDs wife may end up dooming him with magats.
Click to expand...
As Trump's MAGA party fractures under Trump's enormous weight and guilt, anyone who was hesitant about all the white supremacist shit will find an easy excuse to leave the party or simply join the "release the files" group to keep up appearances.
 
QP! said:

What's Next​

The DOJ will now have to present all grand jury materials to Comey's defense team.


------------------

​

Click to expand...
The presiding judge for the trial is Judge Nachmanoffs. He assigned magistrate judge Fitzgerald to oversee the privilege and grand jury issue.

Magistrate judge Fitzgerald by pointing to 11 errors in the grand jury process has basically given a road map to Comey's lawyers to argue that the grand jury process was tainted when they file a motion to dismiss with judge Nachmanoffs.
 

Omg this is laughable.​


it is all embarrassing but so very predictable as to what happens if you think Magats are smart and can do anything without serious error or lying.

This one really cracks me up

"...the prosecutor appears to have suggested the grand jurors could assume the government had additional evidence that would be presented later at trial — language that can improperly lower the prosecutor’s burden in a grand-jury probable-cause determination..."

Note this Comey indictment barely passed getting the bare minimum 12 of 23 votes. One less vote and it fails.

Now imagine Halligan saying to the Grand Jury 'oh do not worry, trust us we have a lot more evidence you are not seeing that will be presented at trial so you can make this determination considering that'. FLOL.

Why would any Prosecutor ever waste time presenting any evidence to a Grand Jury. Just go in, with the weight of the office behind you and tell the GJ to trust you, you have lots of evidence that will be put out in court. :rofl2:







-----------------------------




Ai Summary:

the judge’s written 24-page memorandum opinion (Magistrate Judge William E. Fitzpatrick, Nov. 17, 2025) lists a set of specific factual and legal concerns — essentially eleven discrete findings — that together led him to conclude there is a reasonable basis to suspect the grand-jury process in the Comey case may have been infected by serious errors or misconduct.


Short summary: the judge did not say “the case is dismissed”; he found a reasonable basis to challenge the integrity of the grand jury process and ordered the government to produce the grand-jury materials so Comey’s lawyers can examine them. The judge’s findings focus on (a) how certain evidence was obtained and used (including possible Fourth Amendment/warrant and privilege problems), (b) an agent who had access to potentially privileged material testifying to the grand jury, (c) problematic prosecutor statements to jurors, and (d) unexplained gaps/irregularities in the grand-jury record. Bluesky Social+1
Click to expand...


The judge’s 11 findings (plain-English list, based on the memorandum)​


  1. Reasonable basis to challenge whether the Richman warrants were executed consistent with the Fourth Amendment and the issuing court’s orders.
    (Judge questions whether the searches/seizures that produced key materials were lawfully carried out.) Bluesky Social
  2. Reasonable basis to challenge whether the government exceeded the scope of the original Richman warrants (2019–2020) by seizing/preserving material beyond what the warrants authorized.
    (The opinion flags possible over-seizure of items not within the predicate offenses listed in those warrants.) Bluesky Social
  3. Reasonable basis to challenge whether the government had lawful authority to search/review the Richman materials anew in 2025.
    (Judge questions whether a fresh, lawful predicate existed for re-opening/using those old materials for this new prosecution.) Bluesky Social
  4. Reasonable basis to challenge whether the 2025 seizure of Richman materials included information beyond the scope of the original warrants.
    (A restatement focusing on the 2025 actions specifically — i.e., the later seizure may have swept in extra material.) Bluesky Social
  5. The circumstances surrounding any potential Fourth Amendment / court-order violations provide a reasonable basis to question whether the government’s conduct was willful or in reckless disregard of the law.
    (Judge flags that the handling may have been more than negligent.) Bluesky Social
  6. There is a reasonable basis to show the defense was prejudiced by the government’s use of the Richman materials in presenting the grand jury case (given how central those materials were to the prosecutors’ presentation).
    (If improperly obtained or out-of-scope material was central to the presentation, that can prejudice the defendant.) Bluesky Social
  7. Reasonable basis to challenge whether the government took sufficient steps to avoid collecting and reviewing privileged materials (and why Comey wasn’t afforded an opportunity to assert privilege before indictment).
    (Judge is troubled that privilege claims weren’t handled earlier / separately.) Bluesky Social
  8. Reasonable basis to challenge whether privileged information was used (directly or indirectly) to prepare and present the grand-jury case.
    (Because the sole grand-jury witness had been exposed to privileged material shortly before testifying.) Bluesky Social
  9. The way potentially privileged information was disclosed (and the witness’s continued participation after exposure) gives a reasonable basis to suspect willful or reckless disregard of privilege protections.
    (Agent-3 saw some privileged materials and nonetheless testified — the judge found that highly irregular and troubling.) Bluesky Social
  10. The prosecutor (identified in coverage as Lindsey Halligan)
  11. made statements to the grand jurors that could form the basis to challenge whether the grand-jury proceedings were infected with constitutional error.
    (The opinion says the prosecutor appears to have made at least two “fundamental misstatements of law” — including implying a defendant could not invoke the Fifth Amendment without adverse inference and suggesting jurors need not rely only on the evidence presented to them because the government had more evidence.) Democracy Docket+1
  12. The grand-jury transcript and audio likely do not reflect the full proceedings — there are unexplained gaps/irregularities (notably around the preparation/presentation of a second indictment) that cast doubt on the completeness and accuracy of the record.
    (Judge notes timeline problems: a three-count submission was initially sought, one count was rejected, then a two-count indictment was returned — but the transcript/audio don’t show the necessary subsequent presentation or communications, suggesting missing material or unexplained events.) Reddit+1


Short explanation of the two prosecutor errors the judge emphasized​


  • (a) Fifth Amendment misstatement: the prosecutor apparently told grand jurors they could draw a negative inference if a witness or target exercised their right not to testify — but federal law forbids grand jurors from drawing such an adverse inference. The judge called that a “fundamental misstatement of law.” Democracy Docket
  • (b) Suggesting jurors needn’t rely only on the record before them: the prosecutor appears to have suggested the grand jurors could assume the government had additional evidence that would be presented later at trial — language that can improperly lower the prosecutor’s burden in a grand-jury probable-cause determination. Democracy Docket


Sources / where you can read the judge’s words​


  • The judge’s full memorandum opinion (William E. Fitzpatrick, Nov. 17, 2025) — the primary source for the findings. (CourtListener PDF / court docket). Bluesky Social
  • Reuters coverage summarizing the decision and its practical effects (order to produce grand-jury materials). Reuters
  • Associated Press / Washington Post / Al Jazeera reporting on the judge’s rebuke and the specific concerns about Halligan’s statements and privileged materials. AP News+1


Bottom line (what this means now)​


  • The judge identified serious, specific factual and legal problems (the eleven findings above) that give Comey’s team a reasonable basis to challenge the fairness and constitutionality of the grand-jury presentation.
  • Because of those findings, Fitzpatrick ordered delivery of the grand-jury materials to the defense so Comey’s lawyers can probe further — a highly unusual remedy.
  • The government has asked that the magistrate’s order be stayed and is disputing parts of the judge’s factual account; the matter is under further review. News coverage and the opinion itself are the best places to track how the fight over these findings proceeds. Bloomberg+1
 
Nordberg said:
Comey should sue for vindictive prosecution. Something has to stop Trump from using the justice system as a weapon. He is so petty and vindictive.
Click to expand...
yes, what is needed is something like a PAC, that looks at and funds lawsuits against the Trump gov't for abuses.

There are a lot of suits ongoing but not everyone has the funds to take on the government, even though lawsuits against government abuse can be very profitable and not hard to prove.

Just on all the ICE and Border Patrol stops of citizens, as just one category, there are dozens of abuse cases caught on video where the person says they are a citizen, and they either produce ID or are tackled and held. Even when they show ID like a passport or license, the agents tell them 'i think it is fake' and still tackle and hold them, until they can provide other forms of ID to prove citizenship.

All of those cases would pay out huge and the Fund that pays for the lawsuits can share in the judgement rewards for great profit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top