"I already noted that, after Judge Michael Nachmanoff issued an order setting Monday as the deadline for prosecutors to provide Jim Comey all the discovery in his case, prosecutors submitted what they fashion as a Motion for a Discovery Order. I was going to leave the filing well enough alone. Either Pat Fitzgerald or Judge Nachmanoff will respond later today, when things will get interesting. But there are a number of stupid things about the filing I can't shake."
"2) They're asking for two deadlines - October 14 for the things pertaining to the vindictive prosecution motion and October 20 for everything else, a transparent attempt to keep things from Comey that might be pertinent to his vindictive prosecution motion. Part of their justification for filing this is that the parties had not reached an agreement and so they were following Nachmanoff's order to submit competing versions on Monday."
"On October 8, 2025, the Court ordered "the parties immediately confer regarding the entry of a joint discovery order" and further ordered "that if after good faith discussions the parties are unable to agree on and file a joint discovery order by Friday, October 10, 2025, . . . the parties shall each submit a proposed discovery order by Monday, October 13, 2025, at 5:00 p.m. D.E. 24."
Judge Michael Nachmanoff ordered prosecutors to provide Jim Comey all discovery by Monday. Prosecutors, via Gabriel Diaz, filed a Motion for a Discovery Order that does not present itself as a motion for reconsideration and appears to proceed as if the prior order did not exist. The filing requests two deadlines: October 14 for materials related to the vindictive prosecution motion and October 20 for all other discovery. The staggered deadlines risk delaying access to materials pertinent to Comey's vindictive prosecution claim. The filing justifies its approach by asserting the parties had not agreed and by invoking a holiday affecting the five-business-day calculation.
Read at emptywheel
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]