Judge Says Justice Dept. May Have Committed ‘Misconduct’ in Comey Case
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
A federal magistrate judge said on Monday that the criminal case against James B. Comey, the former F.B.I. director, could be in serious trouble because of a series of apparent errors committed in front of the grand jury by Lindsey Halligan, the inexperienced prosecutor picked by President Trump to handle the matter.
The remarkable rebuke of Ms. Halligan came in a 24-page ruling in which the magistrate judge, William E. Fitzpatrick, lodged broader complaints about the way that prosecutors presented the case to the grand jury and asserted that it could result in the matter being dismissed altogether.
The judge said that when Ms. Halligan appeared — by herself — in front of the grand jury, she made at least two “fundamental and highly prejudicial” misstatements of the law. He also pointed out that the grand jury materials he ordered Ms. Halligan to turn over to him for his review appeared to be incomplete and “likely do not reflect the full proceedings.”
“The court is finding that the government’s actions in this case — whether purposeful, reckless or negligent — raise genuine issues of misconduct, are inextricably linked to the government’s grand jury presentation and deserve to be fully explored by the defense,” Judge Fitzpatrick wrote.
As part of his ruling, the judge ordered prosecutors to provide Mr. Comey’s lawyers with the grand jury materials that he has already looked at — a measure he himself described as “an extraordinary remedy.” Typically, grand jury notes are kept secret before trial, even from defendants and their lawyers.
But the disclosure was needed, Judge Fitzpatrick said, to permit Mr. Comey’s legal team to delve into the question of whether Ms. Halligan and an F.B.I. agent who testified in front of the grand jury had conducted themselves properly when they secured the indictment.
The ruling by Judge Fitzpatrick was only the most recent setback in the Justice Department’s efforts to bring charges against Mr. Comey — a decision that was initially rejected by Ms. Halligan’s predecessor as U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, Erik S. Siebert. In an extraordinary move, Mr. Trump ousted Mr. Siebert in September to make way for Ms. Halligan after he suggested there was insufficient evidence to file an indictment against Mr. Comey.
Judge Fitzpatrick’s harsh words came just days after a different judge involved in the Comey case raised doubts about a separate question pertaining to Ms. Halligan: namely, whether Attorney General Pam Bondi had lawfully appointed to her post as U.S. attorney in the first place. The judge overseeing that issue said she would make a decision on the matter by Thanksgiving.
The indictment against Mr. Comey charges him with lying to and obstructing Congress during an appearance he made in September 2020 in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee. At the hearing, he was asked questions about whether he had authorized anyone at the F.B.I. to serve as an anonymous source in newspaper articles about sensitive investigations.
Ms. Halligan, who had never worked on a criminal case until she was thrust into the Comey prosecution, has faced extensive scrutiny from the moment Mr. Trump installed her atop the U.S. attorney’s office in the Eastern District of Virginia against the wishes of many career prosecutors there. Her critics have pointed out that her previous experience in the law was limited to working as an insurance lawyer and serving on Mr. Trump’s defense team in the case in which he was accused of mishandling classified materials.
Tags
Who is online
177 visitors
Why is it all of Trump's "best people" are losers drawn from file13?
Because he only hires friends, relatives, and acquaintances. Then ask yourself about the kind of person that would consider Trump a friend or acquaintance.
Never a bad time for a Spaceballs meme...
... she's probably done a lot worse for a lot less. no wonder she's a trump/maga favorite ...
She sounds like a lousy lawyer
and she got the lice from Trump's bed.
... lucky she still has her looks. maybe she can attract the sympathy of some elderly divorced millionaire (that has a bad heart, abuses viagra, and never has a pre-nup handy) while she's getting disbarred. after all, her previous job was negotiating insurance settlements, just not for the victims. kind of right up her alley, so to speak ...
I would like to see her disbarred and disgraced
Working to savage the justice system runs into brick wall on occasion.
But, then again, there is the SCOTUS majority that seems to find 'remedies' for the whims of this unitary-executive in spite of justice itself!
BTW, these underlings of Trump will learn (the hard-way) when real justice returns to Washington in the form of a new administration that Trump will leave them hanging out to 'dry.' Especially if they run afoul of their law licenses.
MAY have? Let's mark that down as a contender for understatement of the year.
I've had no use for Comey since he announced to congress that he was opening a bogus e-mail investigation against Hillary just 11 days before the presidential election against Trump, basically handing him the election.
I'd like to see everybody get some serious mud on them over this thoroughly botched illegal court case. Comey included.
P.S. Hillary's private server was never hacked by Russia although the State Department's was.
I also do not give a flying you know what about Comey. BUT allowing POTUS to attack people he doesn't like with the DOJ is wrong and should not be tolerated.
Actually, I am disgusted with the "peoples" resolve to let Trump be Trump with the whole of us in tow-appeasing him. And SCOTUS is a 'joke.' Justices that act/opine in support of a wannabe 'king' can kiss somebody's (not me) you know what!
I am disgusted with the current set of republicans that are allowing a child molester to make a mockery of the Constitution and America as a whole, allowing him to form his own gestapo and giving them free range to terrorize American citizens.
If democrats take over one of both of the senate and house, I foresee multiple impeachments coming Trump's way. However unless they have 60+% in the senate, there will be no punishment for Trump's shitting on the Constitution.
Agree 100%.
As they hope to make a man speaker of the house who was begging Epstein for money after he was convicted of child molestation and are perfectly happening caucusing with a member who literally got instructions from Epstein on how to ask questions during a congressional meeting.
Clean your own before worrying about hysterical claims about Trump. No one will you take you seriously until you do.
This looked obviously sketchy to virtually everyone the moment it happened. So, it’s not surprising a court would also look sideways at this. The real question is will the loyal-to-Trump SCOTUS do its job when the case reaches them (and it will).
The most startling revelation for me (and it is significant) is that this conservative SCOTUS is NOT interested in doing JUSTICE. . . but in doing whatever a flawed and incomplete constitution states in accordance with congressional law-making whether congress is right or wrong in making its laws. Sure, our constitution is a 'thing of stability'- it is imperfect, nevertheless.
Ty Cobb, a former Trump lawyer, says Pam Bondi and Lindsey Halligan could be disbarred over this.
And should be.