The Meritocracy Report
Trump hires only the best!
Via CBS News: Judge who reviewed James Comey’s indictment was confused by prosecutor’s handling of case, transcript shows. That is, I would say, an understatement, and kind of elides who was truly confused.
“So this has never happened before. I’ve been handed two documents that are in the Mr. Comey case that are inconsistent with one another,” Vaala said to Halligan. “There seems to be a discrepancy. They’re both signed by the (grand jury) foreperson.”
And she noted that one document did not clearly indicate what the grand jury had decided.
“The one that says it’s a failure to concur in an indictment, it doesn’t say with respect to one count,” Vaala said. “It looks like they failed to concur across all three counts, so I’m a little confused as to why I was handed two things with the same case number that are inconsistent.”
Halligan initially responded that she hadn’t seen that version of the indictment.
“So I only reviewed the one with the two counts that our office redrafted when we found out about the two — two counts that were true billed, and I signed that one. I did not see the other one. I don’t know where that came from,” Halligan told the judge.
Vaala responded, “You didn’t see it?” And Halligan again told her, “I did not see that one.”
Vaala seemed surprised: “So your office didn’t prepare the indictment that they —”
Halligan then replied, “No, no, no — I — no, I prepared three counts. I only signed the one — the two-count (indictment). I don’t know which one with three counts you have in your hands.”
“Okay. It has your signature on it,” Vaala told Halligan, who responded, “Okay. Well.”
Emphasis mine.
This reminds me of an Executive Order from April: Restoring Equality of Opportunity and Meritocracy.
If there is any need for evidence that attacks on DEI and affirmative action are simply not about meritocracy, hiring people like Halligan (not to mention huge chunks of the cabinet) rather proves the point
It also seems worth noting that this doesn’t sound like the Grand Jury thought this was an especially strong case.
A majority of the grand jury that reviewed the Comey matter voted not to charge him with one of the three counts presented by prosecutors, according to a form that was signed by the grand jury’s foreperson and filed in court. He was indicted on two other counts — making false statements to Congress and obstructing a congressional proceeding — after 14 of 23 jurors voted in favor of them, the foreperson told the judge.
At any rate, who could have predicted any of this after hiring an insurance lawyer with no prosecutorial experience?
Trump’s motives for hiring her for this job were (1) her presumed loyalty, including the willingness to beclown herself in this fashion; and (2) she has the look that he likes in women. It’s anyone’s guess which of those was the primary motive.
Plus, the outcome of these indictments doesn’t matter. He gets his jollies from swiping at enemies, and they have to spend big money on legal fees. It inspires fear and hesitation in other opponents and rivals, too.
Serious question, does that actually make her a DEI hire? That isn’t a joke.
My thinking is that number 2 is a key part of the reason she was picked over an equally obsequious and equally unqualified White man.
FWIW some studies seem to show that White women tend to benefit more from DEI policies:
https://www.miamitimesonline.com/business/studies-show-white-women-benefit-more-from-dei-than-black-people/article_f0bb761e-334c-4151-832d-f3fa0026531a.amp.html
@Matt Bernius:
I mean, I think that she could be said to be filling a certain kind of quota, but I am going to push back on something that I think is a mistake, which is using “DEI hire” in this way, which equates it to hiring an unqualified person to fill a certain category.
@Steven L. Taylor:
I appreciate that call-in and agree with the point. Even in making that ironic observation, I’m helping normalize a framing of DEI I completely disagree with.
Ms. Halligan is being set up to be the fall guy in this case. This prosecution is prima facie ridiculous. The high ranking people in the DOJ don’t want it on their scorecard. Now, they have someone whose status will not be hurt by the loss; it might even enhance her standing by showing her as a loyal soldier willing to dive on a grenade. DEI? No, sacrificial lamb.
@Matt Bernius:
Yes absolutely, where DEI stands for Deluded Entitled Incompetent, and not Diversity Equity Inclusion.