Judge Questions Integrity of Comey Case

A federal judge indicated on Monday that there may be “serious investigative errors” made by the government that could lead to the dismissal of the case against former FBI Director James Comey.

Judge William Fitzpatrick granted a request from Comey for a review of typically confidential grand jury materials, suggesting that there is a possibility that “government misconduct may have tainted the proceedings.”

In his remarks, the judge acknowledged that it’s unusual for the defense to obtain such relief, but emphasized an “alarming pattern of serious investigative errors” by FBI agents and prosecutors, which could undermine the integrity of the grand jury process.

Comey faces accusations of lying to Congress during a 2020 testimony and obstructing a congressional investigation. The government claims that Columbia University law professor Daniel Richman leaked information related to the Hillary Clinton investigation, despite his testimony stating he hadn’t authorized any FBI personnel to act as anonymous sources.

Before filing charges, the government reviewed evidence obtained from search warrants issued in 2019 and 2020 tied to a separate inquiry. Comey’s attorneys raised concerns that Richman, who acted as Comey’s personal attorney after his FBI dismissal, might have exposed investigators to attorney-client privilege.

Judge Michael Nakhanov, appointed by Biden to oversee Comey’s case, told Fitzpatrick to take the defense’s concerns into consideration.

Fitzpatrick stated, “The government appears to be confusing its duty to protect privileged information—with a duty approached casually in this case—and its duty to only seize materials authorized by the court.” This casual attitude toward essential Fourth Amendment rights raises serious questions regarding the information gathered from Richman.

The Justice Department did not respond to inquiries from the Daily Caller News Foundation.

Concerns of Irregularities

Fitzpatrick highlighted that allowing investigators potentially exposed to privileged information to testify before a grand jury was “highly irregular” and a notable deviation from Justice Department practices. He also criticized two statements made by Interim U.S. Attorney Lindsay Harrigan, pointing out they contained “fundamental misstatements of the law” which could compromise the integrity of the process.

One such statement suggested that Comey did not possess a Fifth Amendment right to testify at trial—a serious misrepresentation.

Harrigan, who took over the U.S. attorney’s office in the Eastern District of Virginia after the previous director resigned, reportedly felt pressure from Trump to pursue Comey’s indictment. This indictment was Harrigan’s first.

Both Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James are currently challenging Harrigan’s appointment.

The judge also noted potential gaps in the grand jury report and inconsistencies in how the second version of the indictment was presented.

“The procedural and substantive misconduct in the grand jury, along with how evidence was handled, may amount to government misconduct that prejudices Mr. Comey,” Fitzpatrick concluded.