From the legal reporting team at Deadline: White House with Nicolle Wallace
Happy Thanksgiving! The newsletter is off this week to celebrate the holiday. But before the break, I answered one of your questions. You can read my response below and you can also submit more questions for me to tackle when we return next week.
— Jordan
Ask Jordan
"While it's understandable that both James Comey and Letitia James have every right — and reason — to want their cases dismissed quickly and decisively, is there remaining value to the American public if these cases were allowed to move forward? In other words, notwithstanding the apparent blunders (or intentional deceit) on the part of Lindsey Halligan and her team in their apparent zeal to please the president, I'm fearful that if these cases disappear too quickly, the public may never fully learn how these indictments came to be, how the government intended to argue their case, and that we may never uncover potentially illegal activity on the part of DOJ that should be pursued to the full extent of the law."
— Brad
Hi Brad,
You submitted your question prior to James Comey and Letitia James getting their cases dismissed Monday on the grounds that their prosecutor, Lindsey Halligan, was unlawfully installed by the Trump administration. But the dismissal makes your question even more important, so let's explore it.
My short answer is: No. It wouldn't be better for the cases against the former FBI director and New York attorney general to continue if there's a reason to dismiss them now. Any value that might come from seeing the cases through to trial is outweighed by the dangers of letting legally unworthy cases go on for a second longer than they must.
As for what more we might learn if the cases were to continue, one hypothetical avenue is their unresolved motions to dismiss based on vindictive and selective prosecution. Discovery could reveal more about the government's internal motivations and machinations behind the indictments. And if the cases were to go to trial, then those trials could prompt further revelations, either during the discovery process or at the trials themselves. Trials would also fully answer your question of how the government intended to argue the cases.
