Close Menu
    Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
    Trending
    • Lord Mayor of Belfast receives death threats amid violent disorder
    • Unintended Consequences of Video Surveillance
    • Israeli strikes on south Lebanon kill 12: medical source
    • US inflation hits new three-year high amid energy price surge | Business and Economy News
    • Jonathan Taylor makes feelings on Colts future clear amid uncertainty
    • Letters to the Editor: James Comey’s case actually isn’t all that legally complicated
    • Key takeaways from Tuesday’s primaries: Platner wins, but now faces months of more scrutiny
    • Hormuz block sparks ‘never seen before’ disruption: Shell CEO
    Prime US News
    • Home
    • World News
    • Latest News
    • US News
    • Sports
    • Politics
    • Opinions
    • More
      • Tech News
      • Trending News
      • World Economy
    Prime US News
    Home»Opinions»Letters to the Editor: James Comey’s case actually isn’t all that legally complicated
    Opinions

    Letters to the Editor: James Comey’s case actually isn’t all that legally complicated

    Team_Prime US NewsBy Team_Prime US NewsJune 10, 2026No Comments3 Mins Read
    Share Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Reddit Telegram Email
    Share
    Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Pinterest Email


    To the editor: Contributing author Wayne Unger tries his utmost to current the pending James Comey case as a two-sided problem (“James Comey’s case will play out in a murky area of the law,” June 4). I provide him reward; he jogs my memory of my former legislation professors. However, there’s a layman’s saying that additionally applies right here. He can’t see the forest for the timber.

    He drifts into the realm of the unintentionally hilarious through the use of the phrase “greater than believable” to explain extraordinarily far-fetched rationales which may clarify this debacle. What’s extraordinarily believable is convicted felon President Trump’s abuse of the workplace, with vendetta after vendetta towards any opponents who may need honestly famous his lawlessness. Should we point out once more that Comey eliminated the notorious submit swiftly? He said his ignorance of the attainable double which means, and avowed his opposition to violence. “86” much more generally means “throw him out,” proper?

    Unger timidly closes by noting the sincerity and consciousness in markedly extra strident threats in earlier circumstances. He meekly notes, in his estimation, these components are absent. Do ya suppose? Strategy to take a stand, professor!

    Typically it’s clearly black and white, not authorized grey. There’s a giant outdated forest on the market referred to as the at present misnamed Justice Division bullying innocents.

    Mark J. Diniakos, Thousand Oaks

    ..

    To the editor: In 40-plus years working in bars and eating places in California, I by no means heard “86” used to imply something aside from ejecting a too-rowdy buyer (“86’d”) or a prepare dinner or server saying a selected menu merchandise was “86’d” — not out there, briefly.

    It will be fascinating amid the Comey “86” information to see some reporting about simply the place or how steadily “86” is used with the which means “to kill.”

    Comey’s in any other case ludicrous rock-photo posting costs would have some validity if, along with the posted photograph, he had added the phrase “completely.” And even that I’d take as which means “86 him completely from politics,” not his mortal life.

    Please do a survey. I believe some adults wouldn’t know what “86” meant in any respect, and I doubt few would suppose the shell photograph meant something aside from “take away Trump from the presidency.”

    Mark Davidson, Santa Ana

    ..

    To the editor: The op-ed by Unger is true on. However what I’ve not seen frequently is a dialogue on the burden of proof in a felony case; past an affordable doubt. The time period “86” has a couple of frequent which means, the commonest being to throw somebody out, as I perceive it, and to not kill. See the definition in a dictionary.

    That being so, how can a jury conclude past an affordable doubt that Comey’s intent was to advertise killing moderately than impeachment of the president or use of the twenty fifth Modification to throw him out of workplace, each authorized means? I can’t consider any self-respecting prosecutor would file the cost.

    Gary Hastings, Redondo Seaside



    Source link

    Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Email
    Previous ArticleKey takeaways from Tuesday’s primaries: Platner wins, but now faces months of more scrutiny
    Next Article Jonathan Taylor makes feelings on Colts future clear amid uncertainty
    Team_Prime US News
    • Website

    Related Posts

    Opinions

    Society, not developers, needs to be the priority in AI negotiations

    June 10, 2026
    Opinions

    Contributor: New rules squeeze money from asylum seekers while preventing them from working

    June 10, 2026
    Opinions

    Contributor: How the looming Houthi threat could turn the Iran war

    June 10, 2026
    Add A Comment
    Leave A Reply Cancel Reply

    Most Popular

    B-2 stealth bombers flown into Alaska base ahead of Trump-Putin meeting: Officials

    August 15, 2025

    EU seeks unity in first strike back at Trump tariffs

    April 6, 2025

    Clemson Professor Calls For More Assassinations

    September 15, 2025
    Our Picks

    Lord Mayor of Belfast receives death threats amid violent disorder

    June 10, 2026

    Unintended Consequences of Video Surveillance

    June 10, 2026

    Israeli strikes on south Lebanon kill 12: medical source

    June 10, 2026
    Categories
    • Latest News
    • Opinions
    • Politics
    • Sports
    • Tech News
    • Trending News
    • US News
    • World Economy
    • World News
    • Privacy Policy
    • Disclaimer
    • Terms and Conditions
    • About us
    • Contact us
    Copyright © 2024 Primeusnews.com All Rights Reserved.

    Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.