Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : World Outlook -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Les H who wrote (48668)	11/2/2025 9:01:07 AM
From: Les H	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 48725

New warning signs emerge for Lindsey Halligan’s effort to prosecute Trump’s foes Three recent court rulings disqualifying top prosecutors reveal higher stakes for the U.S. attorney who indicted James Comey and Letitia James. By Erica Orden and Kyle Cheney11/01/2025 04:00 PM EDT President Donald Trump’s effort to install loyalist U.S. attorneys without Senate approval could sink the Justice Department’s criminal cases against former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James. In recent weeks, federal courts in New Jersey, Nevada and California have ruled that unusual maneuvers by the Justice Department to appoint Trump’s unvetted prosecutors violated federal law. Their rulings are a prelude to the potential disqualification of a fourth Trump-backed U.S. attorney: his former personal lawyer Lindsey Halligan, who brought the charges against Comey and James. The rulings against the three interim U.S. attorneys point to the likelihood, legal experts say, that Halligan’s high-profile prosecutions of Comey and James could collapse alongside her own appointment. That’s because the judges concluded that despite the invalid appointments, the prosecutions brought by those disqualified U.S. attorneys could survive because — unlike the Halligan-led prosecutions — they were also approved by career prosecutors who were validly appointed. Halligan, however, secured the indictments of Comey and James by herself, an indication that career prosecutors in the Eastern District of Virginia resisted bringing the cases. Critics have described the prosecutions as political retribution, noting that Trump has vowed revenge against Comey and James for their involvement in previous investigations into him. If Halligan’s appointment is deemed invalid, “there are serious questions about whether the indictment in the Comey and James prosecutions could stand,” said James Pearce, a former Justice Department appellate attorney and senior member of special counsel Jack Smith’s team. Pearce emphasized that in the California, Nevada and New Jersey cases, judges focused on the role that career attorneys played in securing indictments. The disqualified U.S. attorneys played minimal roles in those cases, he said. “It seems far less clear whether that rationale would apply in the [Virginia] prosecutions,” Pearce added. Jacqueline Kelly, a former federal prosecutor in the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York, said the demise of those cases coupled with Halligan’s disqualification “could be a long-term consequence of a decision that was made for short-term reasons.” “It becomes a clash of priorities, in a sense,” she said. Kelly predicted that if the efforts to disqualify U.S. attorneys and dismiss indictments brought by them are successful, the Trump administration might reprioritize Senate confirmations. “They may refocus on … trying to persuade senators into voting for particular appointments instead of trying to do this end-run around the appointments clause.” New warning signs emerge for Lindsey Halligan’s effort to prosecute Trump’s foes - POLITICO