“This is just another example and will be rectified on appeal.”
On what basis do you expect a reversal on appeal?
Here’s my understanding, please correct me if I’m wrong:
1. The position of U.S. Attorney is subject to Senate confirmation. At present, there is no U.S. Attorney for that district who’s been confirmed.
2. To make sure that the office keeps functioning while the Senate process is going forward, the Attorney General can appoint an interim U.S. Attorney.
3. BUT to make sure that the requirement of Senate confirmation isn’t permanently bypassed, interim appointments can’t last more than 120 days.
4. If, after 120 days, there’s still no Senate-confirmed U.S. Attorney in that district, then the district judges get together and appoint an interim U.S. Attorney.
5. At the time Halligan signed these indictments, it had been more than 120 days since there was a duly nominated and confirmed U.S. Attorney in place. Therefore, neither the President nor the Attorney General had the authority to make another interim appointment — which is what Halligan was.
So, why was the judge wrong — other than saying that we think Comey was guilty?
I do not know that Comey is guilty or not. I have confidence that Pres Trump and his team would not have prosecuted knowing all that was the case. As has been the case since 2015, my money is on Trump. Watch and learn.