Ex-Democrat Florida gov nominee not guilty of lying to FBI

[Omaha Steve]

Source: AP

By ANTHONY IZAGUIRRE 11 minutes ago

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. (AP) — Former Florida Democratic candidate for governor Andrew Gillum, who came within a whisker of defeating Republican Ron DeSantis in 2018, was acquitted Thursday of lying to the FBI in a corruption case that also involved illegal use of campaign contributions.

But the federal jury hung on charges that Gillum funneled tens of thousands of dollars in campaign money to personal accounts. Prosecutors said they will retry him on those counts. They had claimed Gillum was struggling financially after quitting his $120,000-a-year job with the People for the American Way group to run for governor.

Gillum was acquitted of lying to undercover FBI agents posing as developers who paid for a 2016 trip he took with his brother to New York, including hotel rooms, meals, a boat tour and a ticket to the hit Broadway show “Hamilton.”

Outside the courthouse, Gillum thanked his family, wife, legal team and pastor for their support, but took a dig at prosecutors.




Read more: https://apnews.com/article/gillum-corruption-trial-florida-desantis-c6fc38fd504c3c48f72e8050d1779df0

[Lovie777]

1. K&R......

[Alexander Of Assyria]

2. Meanwhile the real felons like Walker get the benefit of doubt attached to the R. D doesn't cut it.

[50 Shades Of Blue]

3. Good!

[live love laugh]

4. "... retry him again" Now THATs a witch hunt.

[Alexander Of Assyria]

5. Ink wasn't dry on the verdict and the prosecutors began foaming at the mouth. Unprofessional.

Contrast with Garland,

[former9thward]

9. The prosecutors work for Garland.

[SunSeeker]

11. Jeff Sessions was AG when the FBI conducted the lying entrapment sting in 2017.

It was that June 14, 2017 sting that led to the lying to the FBI charge. “On or about June 14, 2017, Gillum voluntarily agreed to speak with FBI agents,” the indictment stated. “During the conversation, Gillum falsely represented that Southern Pines representatives never offered Gillum anything or gave to Gillum anything, and that Gillum stopped having communications with Southern Pines representatives about the campaign contributions following their attempt to link the campaign contributions to support for potential projects in Tallahassee.”

Trump's AG put his most Trumpy prosecutors on the case, I'm sure. Gillum was a rising Dem star at the time. Trump always brags how he got DeSantis elected governor in 2018. Gillum was leading by up to 9 points in polls against DeSantis in the months leading up to the election in 2018, but then, in an October surprise, word got out about the FBI sting, and DeSantis used it in attack ads and won the governor seat, albeit by just 32,463 votes.

When Garland took over DOJ, those prosecutors kept doing what they were doing. Garland gives his prosecutors a free hand, like he's supposed to. He would never intervene like Bill Barr did.

So suggesting this prosecution and decision to retry were Garland's is wrong.

[former9thward]

15. No, the AG doesn't give prosecutors a "free hand".

No AG does that and they shouldn't. And no attorney who has ever had dealings with the DOJ would agree with you.

[SunSeeker]

18. Yes, the non-corrupt ones do.

Supervising a seasoned prosecutor, a good one anyway, does not involve constantly telling them what to do. In my experience, it is VERY unusual for a supervisor or department head to step in and go against the prosection decision of their line prosecutors. When they do, it looks really bad either for the prosecutor or the supervisor depending on the reason for the intervention. When that happens to a prosecutor, they tend to leave the Department. It means they have lost the trust of their supervisor.

[SunSeeker]

12. Yup. Unlike Barr, Garland doesn't tell his prosecutors what to do. nt

[moreland01]

6. Unrealized potential

Such a bummer.

[Deuxcents]

7. I will agree.

[slightlv]

8. Gillum must not have redirected enough money!

Or is the "D" behind his name? Nah.... that couldn't be it, could it?

[former9thward]

10. He was tried by AG Garland's DOJ.

Is the DOJ sending people to trial simply because they are Democrats?

[SunSeeker]

13. Garland lets his prosecutors exercise their own prosecutorial discretion, unlike Barr.

Those prosecutors started this before Garland took office, as I note above. You expect Garland to intervene because Gillum is a Dem? Garland is no Bill Barr.

[Alexander Of Assyria]

14. You understand the difference between a political and a true independent DOJ.

Republicans have poisoned so much, including clear normal thought.

[former9thward]

16. You are wrong.

How many dealings have you ever had with the DOJ? Any of them? No AG let's people get tried if they do not think it is proper. It would be the height of irresponsibility.

[SunSeeker]

17. No, you are wrong, former9thward.

I have worked with county, state and federal prosecutors for over 20 years. They all have substantial autonomy to decide which cases to pursue. It is the PROSECUTOR'S job to determine whether an investigation is warranted and decide whether to pursue a conviction. Sure, they get their supervisor's sign-off, but unless the case on its face is egregiously inappropriate to bring, they get that signoff and go ahead and file. All non-corrupt supervisors/department heads trust their line deputies' judgment and generally give them the benefit of the doubt, i.e., they allow them to exercise prosecutorial discretion. If they don't trust the line prosecutors, those line prosecutors don't stay there long.