Former FBI Director James Comey faces an uphill battle in proving that his prosecution for lying to Congress was selective or vindictive, according to his lawyers' motion to dismiss the charges. The hurdle lies in demonstrating that Comey was singled out for prosecution while others who allegedly committed similar crimes were not.
To prove a selective prosecution, Comey's lawyers must show that he was targeted specifically due to his criticism of President Trump. While others have been prosecuted for similar offenses, including former Trump fixer Michael Cohen and Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger, the case seems unlikely to overcome the burden of proof.
However, proving a vindictive prosecution may be more feasible, given Trump's repeated statements and social media posts urging prosecution of Comey. The motion to dismiss highlights this argument by citing Trump's claims that Comey was a "Dirty Cop" and a "total SLIMEBALL!" Furthermore, no other prosecutor besides Trump's former personal lawyer, Lindsey Halligan, would seek charges against Comey.
Despite the strength of this argument, the prosecution may still argue that the charges were brought without animus towards Comey. The grand jury found probable cause for the two charges, which could be seen as evidence that the charges could have been brought even if there was no personal hostility.
In a fallback position, Comey's lawyers are seeking discovery and a hearing on their motion to dismiss the indictment. Given Trump's public statements and the legal precedent on this issue, many experts believe the judge is likely to choose this course of action.
However, regardless of how the trial judge rules, the losing side will undoubtedly appeal, potentially all the way to the Supreme Court. The outcome remains uncertain, but one thing is clear: Comey's case has the potential to be a landmark moment in shaping the boundaries of presidential power and the Department of Justice's discretion in prosecuting high-profile cases.
To prove a selective prosecution, Comey's lawyers must show that he was targeted specifically due to his criticism of President Trump. While others have been prosecuted for similar offenses, including former Trump fixer Michael Cohen and Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger, the case seems unlikely to overcome the burden of proof.
However, proving a vindictive prosecution may be more feasible, given Trump's repeated statements and social media posts urging prosecution of Comey. The motion to dismiss highlights this argument by citing Trump's claims that Comey was a "Dirty Cop" and a "total SLIMEBALL!" Furthermore, no other prosecutor besides Trump's former personal lawyer, Lindsey Halligan, would seek charges against Comey.
Despite the strength of this argument, the prosecution may still argue that the charges were brought without animus towards Comey. The grand jury found probable cause for the two charges, which could be seen as evidence that the charges could have been brought even if there was no personal hostility.
In a fallback position, Comey's lawyers are seeking discovery and a hearing on their motion to dismiss the indictment. Given Trump's public statements and the legal precedent on this issue, many experts believe the judge is likely to choose this course of action.
However, regardless of how the trial judge rules, the losing side will undoubtedly appeal, potentially all the way to the Supreme Court. The outcome remains uncertain, but one thing is clear: Comey's case has the potential to be a landmark moment in shaping the boundaries of presidential power and the Department of Justice's discretion in prosecuting high-profile cases.
This whole situation with Comey feels super fishy 
to me... I mean, how many times can one guy get prosecuted for basically saying something critical about the President? 
It's like the system is stacked against him, you know? But at the same time, if Trump was really that angry about Comey, shouldn't he've just spoken up in court or something? 
Still, it's gonna be a wild ride watching this all play out in court 
I'm literally on the edge of my seat waiting for what's gonna happen next! I mean, can you even imagine if Trump was behind all those personal attacks on Comey? It's like, totally fishy, right?! 
But at the same time, I think it's super interesting that they're trying to prove a vindictive prosecution. Like, come on Trump, stop playing games and let Comey have his day in court already! 
.
. And if Trump's team keeps pushing forward with these charges, that'll just add more fuel to the fire 
.
. Can't wait to see how it all unfolds! 
and in public statements... I mean, I get it, Trump has a history of being, well,Trump, but still? It feels like there's gonna be some major drama at trial 
. And can we talk about how weird it is that only one person besides Lindsey Halligan would even consider charging Comey? Like, what's up with that?! 
And even if the judge rules against him, I'm sure his lawyers will just appeal and try again. It's like, a whole saga, fam! 