|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
Judge
Michael
Nachmanoff
holds a
hearing
in James
Comey's
criminal
case in
Arlington,
Virginia,
on
Wednesday,
November
19,
2025.
(Dana
Verkouteren) |
| |
DOJ's
Case
Against
Comey
Faces
Crisis
and
Reversals
Marc
Kennedy
-
National-Politics
Tell Us
USA News
Network
ALEXANDRIA,
VA - The
criminal
prosecution
of
former
FBI
Director
James
Comey
has
reached
crisis
mode, as
irregularities
in the
Justice
Department’s
grand
jury
procedures
spark
unprecedented
judicial
scrutiny
and
rapid
reversals
by
federal
prosecutors.
At a
Wednesday
hearing,
prosecutors
admitted
not all
grand
jury
members
had
reviewed
the
final
indictment
before
voting.
By
Thursday,
DOJ
officials
claimed
that
official
transcripts
showed
full
jury
approval—contradicting
their
earlier
statement
and
raising
further
questions.
In
response,
U.S.
Attorney
Lindsey
Halligan
and
other
officials
publicly
criticized
the
judge,
with
Halligan
alleging
he
called
her a
"puppet."
While
the
judge
did not
make
such a
direct
assertion,
he
questioned
if that
reflected
the
defense's
view.
On
Monday,
a
federal
magistrate
judge
issued a
scathing
ruling,
citing
"a
disturbing
pattern
of
profound
investigative
missteps"
by
prosecutors.
The
judge
condemned
the DOJ
for
failing
to
secure
proper
search
warrants
before
accessing
decades-old
evidence
that may
have
included
confidential
attorney-client
material—calling
the
oversight
"inexplicable"
and
"highly
unusual."
Comey’s
defense
team
claims
the
prosecution
is
politically
motivated,
referencing
President
Trump's
September
social
media
demand
that
Attorney
General
Pam
Bondi
pursue
his
opponents:
"JUSTICE
MUST BE
SERVED,
NOW!!!"
Within
hours of
Trump’s
post,
Halligan
was
appointed
interim
U.S.
attorney,
and the
indictment
soon
followed.
Attorneys
for
Comey
and New
York
Attorney
General
Letitia
James
are also
challenging
Halligan’s
appointment,
arguing
it was
unlawful
without
Senate
confirmation.
A
federal
judge is
expected
to rule
on this
issue by
Thanksgiving.
Comey,
who was
fired by
Trump in
2017,
has
pleaded
not
guilty
to
charges
of
making
false
statements
to
Congress
and
obstructing
a
congressional
proceeding.
Trial
Judge
Michael
Nachmanoff
has
declined
an
immediate
decision,
saying
the
issues
are “too
weighty
and too
complex”
for a
ruling
from the
bench.
The case
moves
forward
on
multiple
tracks,
with the
judge
ordering
both
sides to
submit
briefs
on a
1969
Supreme
Court
precedent
related
to grand
jury
irregularities.
This
revision
improves
readability
and flow
while
fully
omitting
citations
as
requested.
Let me
know if
you'd
like any
further
edits or
formatting.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|