Advisory Opinions Selective Prosecutions
5 snips
Sep 30, 2025 The hosts dive into the contentious indictment of James Comey, exploring the grand jury process and highlighting concerns about selective prosecution. They debate whether presidents can direct individual prosecutions, citing historical examples of executive influence. The conversation touches on the potential political fallout of acquittals and dismissals and why these could intensify public polarization. They also dissect notable Supreme Court dissents, emphasizing the powerful role personal experiences play in shaping judicial opinions.
AI Snips
Chapters
Books
Transcript
Episode notes
Grand Jury Realities
- Grand juries hear only the prosecutor's side and can return indictments with minimal resistance.
- The Comey presentment got bare majorities on counts, showing how messy and low-threshold grand juries can be.
Thin Evidence In The Comey Indictment
- The Comey indictment relies on thin factual gaps and recycled testimony from 2017 and 2020.
- David French argues the publicly available record shows weak evidentiary footing and unclear 'there there' for criminal charges.
Politicized Surroundings Of The Case
- David describes unusual politicized circumstances around the prosecution, including Trump firing and praising a U.S. attorney.
- He says Lindsey Halligan reportedly pursued charges despite local prosecutors' reluctance, making the process look irregular.
