Brief Comey Indictment Prompts Questions and Criticism.

[Hafar1014]

The two-page indictment of James B. Comey, the former F.B.I. director, offered little indication of the evidence that would be presented at a trial. Some legal experts called it flimsy and dangerous. The indictment of James B. Comey, the former F.B.I. director, was just two pages long and contained so little detail that it was hard for legal experts to assess its merits.

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/26/us/politics/comey-indictment-legal-reaction.html

Some former government lawyers, as well as prominent Democrats, said the case appeared so flimsy that it was likely to fail. Some Republicans also expressed concerns, though supporters of President Trump, who had relentlessly pushed for Mr. Comey’s prosecution, praised the fact that Mr. Comey was indicted.

A federal grand jury indicted Mr. Comey on Thursday on one count of making a false statement and one count of obstruction of a congressiciousnal proceeding in connection with his testimony to a Senate committee in September 2020. The brief indictment was signed by Lindsey Halligan, a former defense lawyer for Mr. Trump whom he had appointed just days earlier as the U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia — and whose first courtroom experience came when she presented the case, alone, in court on Thursday.

Halligan never prosecuted a case in her life, she is by trade an insurance lawyer Comey never the source of any leak, McCabe already owned up that. This political malicious prosecution by president who is weaponizing the DOJ to go after his perceived enemies.

The evidence will be documents democrats forgot to destroy and witness testimony that contradicts Comeys testimony.

 

[Lesh]

An indictment doesn’t have to provide any evidence. It’s simply a charging document, met to give notice to the accused of the crime.

Doesn’t have to be long, frankly two pages, for two indictments is plenty

An indictment indicates that there is enough evidence to bring a case to trial

“Doesn’t have to provide ANY evidence “ is a stupid and false statement

 

[Hafar1014]

An indictment indicates that there is enough evidence to bring a case to trial

“Doesn’t have to provide ANY evidence “ is a stupid and false statement

Yes they do they have to present evidence to a grand jury

 

[struth]

An indictment indicates that there is enough evidence to bring a case to trial

“Doesn’t have to provide ANY evidence “ is a stupid and false statement

Correct.

The evidence was presented to a grand jury. The grand jury doesn’t provide that evidence in the indictment

The indictment is not evidence. The fact someone is even indicted isn’t evidence they committed a crime.

 

[Lesh]

Correct.

The evidence was presented to a grand jury. The grand jury doesn’t provide that evidence in the indictment

The indictment is not evidence. The fact someone is even indicted isn’t evidence they committed a crime.

Did someone say that a GJ presents evidence?

No?

You’re just babbling?

Oh

And your last paragraph made sense

That is all

 

[struth]

Did someone say that a GJ presents evidence?

No?

You’re just babbling?

Oh

And your last paragraph made sense

That is all

no, nobody said the GJ presented evidence. What I said is that evidence was presented to a GJ. Wow you are dumb, to basic civics and how our process works

 

[Lesh]

Correct.

The evidence was presented to a grand jury. The grand jury doesn’t provide that evidence in the indictment

The indictment is not evidence. The fact someone is even indicted isn’t evidence they committed a crime.

Dude . Read your post.

You’re refuting a claim no one made

Go back in your hole troll

no, nobody said the GJ presented evidence. What I said is that evidence was presented to a GJ. Wow you are dumb, to basic civics and how our process works

what you said… was that the GJ doesn’t present evidence. Why you said that no one knows

You’re an idiot

 

[struth]

Dude . Read your post.

You’re refuting a claim no one made

Go back in your hole troll

what you said… was that the GJ doesn’t present evidence. Why you said that no one knows

You’re an idiot

Um because you asked if anyone asked…

Are you high?

And holy F you said i was wrong for saying an indictment didn’t have to provide evidence

 

[CrusaderFrank]

One might want to remember that Comey is (or was) a Republican

Excellent!

 

[Astrostar]

Halligan keeps stumbling early in her attempt to prosecute Comey on Trump’s behalf

In the latest mark against the Trump-demanded political prosecution, a judge observed an apparent rush to indict before fully investigating the case.

www.msnbc.com

If you're going after Trump's enemies, with zero evidence, at least use a prosecutor with some competence. Just because someone is blond, and appeals to Trump, does not make her a competent prosecutor.

Trump is going to lose the Comey case, bigly!!!

 

[JLW]

The only thing keeping this nation from falling further into full authoritarianism is the incompetence of the Trump Administration and its cabal of fools.

 

[OhPleaseJustQuit]

The only thing keeping this nation from falling further into full authoritarianism is the incompetence of the Trump Administration and its cabal of fools.

.

Thanks for sharing your opinion.





.

 

[1srelluc]

Well, if the vile dems are bitching about a thing then you know that thing is going well.

 

[Silent Warrior]

Halligan keeps stumbling early in her attempt to prosecute Comey on Trump’s behalf

In the latest mark against the Trump-demanded political prosecution, a judge observed an apparent rush to indict before fully investigating the case.

www.msnbc.com

If you're going after Trump's enemies, with zero evidence, at least use a prosecutor with some competence. Just because someone is blond, and appeals to Trump, does not make her a competent prosecutor.

Trump is going to lose the Comey case, bigly!!!

Yeah. If the DOJ sinks much lower it will be as bad as it was under Biden.

 

[0311]

ALEXANDRIA, Va. (AP) — A federal judge on Wednesday ordered prosecutors in the criminal case of former FBI Director James Comey to produce to defense lawyers a trove of materials from the investigation, saying he was concerned the Justice Department’s position had been to “indict first” and investigate second.

Judge in Comey case scolds prosecutors as he orders them to produce records from probe

A federal judge has ordered prosecutors in the criminal case of former FBI Director James Comey to produce materials from the investigation, saying he’s concerned the Justice Department’s position had been to “indict first" and investigate second.

apnews.com

U.S. Magistrate Judge William Fitzpatrick instructed prosecutors to produce by the end of the day on Thursday grand jury materials and other evidence that investigators seized during the investigation. The order followed arguments in which Comey’s attorneys said they were at a disadvantage because they had not been able to yet review information that was collected years ago as part of an investigation into FBI media leaks.

Comey, who attended the hearing but did not speak, is charged with lying to Congress in 2020 in a case filed days after President Donald Trump appeared to urge his attorney general to prosecute the former FBI director and other perceived political enemies. Comey has pleaded not guilty, and his lawyers have argued that it’s a vindictive prosecution brought at the direction of the Republican president and must be dismissed.

Really bad DOJ, withholding material that should have turned over during discovery. This prosecutorial misconduct.

 

[1srelluc]

They just took a page from the Comey playbook....Geez Judge, I don't recall not giving them the documents, I'll get right on that.

 

[Manonthestreet]

Poor Comey doesn't like his medicine. Send him away forever

 

[g5000]

.

In their zealous partisan hackery, the Trump DOJ trampled all over the Constitution once again, violating the Fourth Amerndment in this case.

This is what happens when an orange clown hires even dumber clowns whose only mission in life is not to the law, but to Dear Leader.

As I have said countless times, the reason we have the Fourth Amendment is precisely because totalitarians have a very bad habit of finding what they are looking for, and God help you if they set their sites on you.

.

 

[Zincwarrior]

This makes one think the judge is leaning towards the petition of dismissing the charge as well due to selective prosecution and wrongly appointed prosecutor.

 

[WEATHER53]

Another rambling judge playing favors and feeling he’s dealing with childlike libs by doling out the shaming.