Possible Legal Theories and Evidence Limits in Homan Case

We know more this week about indictment of James Comey. Maybe the grand jury vote was weak, but an indictment is an indictment, right? Maybe not. We discuss how Comey’s attorneys are likely to seek dismissal of the indictments. Meanwhile, we have some more detail on how the FBI came to be conducting a public corruption investigation into Tom Homan when he wasn’t even a public official. That — plus a discussion of Jeanine Pirro’s unusual use of a local grand jury to obtain a federal indictment in Washington D.C. — is this week’s free show. For paid subscribers, we also discuss:

* The Trump administration’s novel use of the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act to sue pro-Palestinian activists who ended up in a brawl outside a New Jersey synagogue;

* Judge William Young’s righteously angry ruling holding that the Trump administration has violated immigrants’ First Amendment rights by revoking their visas over their protest activity;

* Google’s high-dollar settlement of a case about YouTube that Donald Trump already lost, which will be used to finance the grand new ballroom at the White House;

* Smartmatic’s partial summary judgment win against Mike Lindell over his stolen election claims; and

* Harvard’s countersuit against former Harvard Business School professor Francesca Gino, whom they de-tenured over research fraud, most famously including a fraudulent paper about dishonesty.

Sign up for our full-length episodes at serioustrouble.show