General Discussion

Ocelot II

(126,272 posts) Thu Jul 17, 2025, 04:12 PM Jul 17

"There is probably nobody who knows more about what's in the Epstein files than Maurene Comey."

- Speculating about her firing on Nicole Wallace's show just now - Nobody in the federal government knows more about that case than she does. The panel seems to suspect her firing wasn't on account of who her father is (though that probably was a little extra prize). There's no logic to it; Trump might just want to make her a fall guy and deflect blame to satisfy MAGA. They don't think it will work, and that she's likely to contest her firing.

18 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

"There is probably nobody who knows more about what's in the Epstein files than Maurene Comey." (Original Post) Ocelot II Jul 17 OP

I would think she does know a lot more than just about anyone and no employee restraints now..hmmmm Deuxcents Jul 17 #1

She's still bound by attorney-client privilege and federal confidentiality rules Ocelot II Jul 17 #2

The American people are the client hot2na Jul 17 #3

It doesn't work that way when you're prosecuting a case. Ocelot II Jul 17 #5

If it was me I would spill the beans hot2na Jul 17 #9

I don't think you would. The consequences would be pretty serious. Ocelot II Jul 17 #12

Trump's always signaling. Bad things in the "files' could be due to Comey -- not allegorical oracle Jul 17 #4

I think Maurene gives him a convenient connection to her father, someone else Ocelot II Jul 17 #6

I still don't understand this move? Thechefs2023 Jul 17 #7

By even referring to Trump she'd be violating confidentiality requirements - Ocelot II Jul 17 #8

Welcome to DU LetMyPeopleVote Jul 18 #18

There's a lot of shit we see and lots more we don't. We could, but we won't. twodogsbarking Jul 17 #10

He's going to say that she's following in her Dad's footsteps Figarosmom Jul 17 #11

I might be missing something, Mtnmama Jul 17 #13

By that time Epstein's case was closed and he was dead, but Maxwell's prosecution Ocelot II Jul 17 #15

Ahem ... (cough, cough) ... Merrick Garland was Attorney General FakeNoose Jul 17 #17

Kristy Greenberg, the legal analyst on Nicole's show. senseandsensibility Jul 17 #14

He wants to disappear some of those files. Joinfortmill Jul 17 #16

Deuxcents

(23,248 posts)

1. I would think she does know a lot more than just about anyone and no employee restraints now..hmmmm

Reply to Ocelot II (Original post)

Thu Jul 17, 2025, 04:15 PM

Jul 17

Ocelot II

(126,272 posts)

2. She's still bound by attorney-client privilege and federal confidentiality rules

Reply to Deuxcents (Reply #1)

Thu Jul 17, 2025, 04:17 PM

Jul 17

that apply even after you're no longer employed by DoJ. She can't just spill all now; if she could, they definitely wouldn't have fired her.

hot2na

(440 posts)

3. The American people are the client

Reply to Ocelot II (Reply #2)

Thu Jul 17, 2025, 04:22 PM

Jul 17

The American people are the client and we have a need to know.

Ocelot II

(126,272 posts)

5. It doesn't work that way when you're prosecuting a case.

Reply to hot2na (Reply #3)

Thu Jul 17, 2025, 04:30 PM

Jul 17

There are confidentiality rules that apply to prosecutors, even after a trial is over, especially if there is material in the files that could interfere with other possible pending prosecutions or unfairly implicate innocent people. I agree that the files should be made public, but a line prosecutor like Maurene Comey doesn't have the authority to do it.

hot2na

(440 posts)

9. If it was me I would spill the beans

Reply to Ocelot II (Reply #5)

Thu Jul 17, 2025, 05:20 PM

Jul 17

Ocelot II

(126,272 posts)

12. I don't think you would. The consequences would be pretty serious.

Reply to hot2na (Reply #9)

Thu Jul 17, 2025, 05:53 PM

Jul 17

I'm sure she'd like to keep her law license, and would rather not have to pay a fat fine or go to jail.

allegorical oracle

(5,428 posts)

4. Trump's always signaling. Bad things in the "files' could be due to Comey -- not

Reply to Ocelot II (Original post)

Thu Jul 17, 2025, 04:28 PM

Jul 17

because they're true.

Ocelot II

(126,272 posts)

6. I think Maurene gives him a convenient connection to her father, someone else

Reply to allegorical oracle (Reply #4)

Thu Jul 17, 2025, 04:34 PM

Jul 17

who once locked horns with him, so he can try to spin a conspiracy involving a former FBI director. Trump is in a sticky spot, though, because he previously made such a big deal about releasing the file and now he doesn't want to and he's claiming it's all fake. He's painted himself into a corner here.

Thechefs2023

(1 post)

7. I still don't understand this move?

Reply to Ocelot II (Original post)

Thu Jul 17, 2025, 04:51 PM

Jul 17

Isn't this just inviting her to talk by firing her? She doesn't have to give up names but she could say something like "I can see why President Trump wouldn't want the files released..." and just leave it at that.

Ocelot II

(126,272 posts)

8. By even referring to Trump she'd be violating confidentiality requirements -

Reply to Thechefs2023 (Reply #7)

Thu Jul 17, 2025, 05:07 PM

Jul 17

she'd be hinting that there's bad stuff in the files about him (assuming there is). I don't think she'll say anything about the files, but as a line prosecutor instead of a political appointee, she can contest her firing through the Civil Service system.