Behind the Comey Indictment: What the Law Says and What We Don’t Know

1. 83

   Sharlee01posted 5 weeks ago

   James Comey Indictment: Legal Perspectives
   
   On September 25, 2025, former FBI Director James Comey was indicted by a federal grand jury on two felony charges of making false statements and obstruction related to his 2020 testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee. The indictment alleges that Comey denied authorizing anyone at the FBI to act as an anonymous source for the media, despite evidence suggesting otherwise. If convicted, Comey faces up to five years in prison
   
   Legal Analysis: Strengths and Weaknesses
   
   Strengths of the Prosecution:
   
   Grand Jury Indictment: The indictment was returned by a federal grand jury in Alexandria, Virginia, indicating that there was sufficient evidence to charge Comey with the alleged offenses. Interestingly, the grand jury reportedly convened on September 24 and returned the charges the very next day. While unusual, this one-day session to see the evidence could suggest that prosecutors had prepared a strong case, and that there may be additional evidence not publicly disclosed.
   
   Specific Allegations: The charges are specific, citing Comey's statements under oath during his 2020 testimony, which the prosecution contends were false and obstructed the congressional investigation.
   
   Weaknesses and Challenges:
   
   Lack of Direct Evidence in Public: The indictment does not provide direct evidence that Comey authorized the leaks, relying instead on circumstantial evidence and the testimony of others.
   
   Potential for Legal Defenses: Comey’s legal team may argue that his statements were truthful, that he did not have the authority to authorize leaks, or that the charges are politically motivated.
   
   Previous Investigations: An earlier investigation by the Department of Justice's Office of the Inspector General found that Comey violated FBI policies by retaining and sharing memos but did not find evidence of criminal conduct.
   
   Possibility of Undisclosed Evidence -- The Comey Case: Grand Jury Action and Potential Evidence We Haven’t Seen
   
   While the public indictment lacks certain details, it is very possible the prosecution possesses additional evidence that has not been disclosed. This could include classified documents, witness testimony, or other materials that strengthen the case against Comey. The rapid ONE-DAY grand jury session to review and return charges is seen as unusual, but one might surmise that the evidence presented was compelling enough for the grand jury to act quickly.
   
   The legal case against James Comey presents both strengths and weaknesses. While the grand jury’s swift decision to indict suggests some level of evidence, the lack of direct public proof and the potential for robust legal defenses may complicate the prosecution’s efforts. The possibility of undisclosed evidence could tip the scales, but until such information is made public, the ultimate outcome remains uncertain.
   
   Response from Comey: In a video posted to social media, Comey declared his innocence and vowed to fight the charges, stating, "I'm not afraid". His arraignment is scheduled for October 9, 2025.

   replyreport
   1. 61

      Willowarborposted 5 weeks agoin reply to this

      "While the grand jury’s swift decision to indict suggests some level of evidence,..."
      
      Why would that be the conclusion? A point that you left out is only 14 of 23 jurors thought there was enough to indict  (on two of the three counts) after hearing a one-sided presentation.   Not promising for unanimous verdict of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt after vigorous defense at trial....
      
      Looks like it's off to a hilariously great start
      
      
      The case won’t likely even make it to a jury. The judge will grant a motion to acquit for lack of evidence.
      This was just a distraction from the Epstein files
      
      Whoever eventually goes in front of a judge with this BS is going to be completely excoriated and probably deserves sanctions.

      replyreport
      1. 87

         My Esotericposted 3 weeks agoin reply to this

         That is a very good point! I didn't realize that the grand jury almost did not indict - as you said, that shows just how weak Trump's case is.
         
         As the saying goes, a half decent prosecutor can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich - and here that dolt Trump put in could even get one of the charges though.
         
         This is going to be fun watching Comey and James make mincemeat of Trump and Bondi.

         replyreport
   2. 66

      TheShadowSpecterposted 3 weeks agoin reply to this

      What bewilders me, Sharlee01, is how James Comey was able to hold on to his security clearance after President Trump fired him from his position as FBI Director.  It's as though Comey knew how to slip under everyone's radar, even the presisdent's.  In any event, Comey has gotten away with enough crap.  I hope he gets assigned T.S. Ellis III as his judge in his Federal criminal trial.  T.S. Ellis III has a reputation of being the toughest Federal judge in the Eastern District of Virginia, and he has made it known how much he hates it whenever FBI officials lie, especially under oath.  Comey is sure to get the maximum sentence if he gets tried in T.S. Ellis III's courtroom.  Comey will be crying throughout the entire courtroom proceedings.  It'll go down in history as the first time that a former FBI Director has ever had to serve time behind bars for his crimes.

      replyreport
      1. 83

         Sharlee01posted 3 weeks agoin reply to this

         I get what you mean about accountability. T.S. Ellis III is known for being a tough, no-nonsense judge who doesn’t tolerate dishonesty, so if Comey ever faced trial in his courtroom, it would definitely be a serious and high-profile situation. It would certainly be historic to see a former FBI Director held fully accountable.

         replyreport
         1. 87

            My Esotericposted 3 weeks agoin reply to this

            Should we hold Trump fully accountable first? Comey didn't incite an insurrection did he, but Trump did and you seem willing to let him off the hook.

            replyreport
            1. 80

               wildernessposted 3 weeks agoin reply to this

               Trump HAS been held accountible...for telling peaceful demonstrators to continue to be peaceful and talk to their legislator.
               
               You call that "insurrection" but whatever the label, he was held accountable and paid the appropriate punishment.

               replyreport
               1. 66

                  TheShadowSpecterposted 3 weeks agoin reply to this

                  Agreed.

                  replyreport
               2. 87

                  My Esotericposted 2 weeks agoin reply to this

                  So you are still one of the ones who refuses to believe their eyes and label what Trump did a peaceful protest?  To each his own, I suppose.
                  
                  Only 19% of "pure" independents see it your way. 48% are certain it was an insurrection and 33% aren't sure yet.

                  replyreport
         2. 66

            TheShadowSpecterposted 3 weeks agoin reply to this

            Sharlee01?  Even if I were a diehard Democrat, I'd still want James Comey to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of thelaw.  He's symbolic of some of the most powerful people from the FBI, current and former, who have harmed innocent individuals.  He deserves to go to prison.

            replyreport
            1. 87

               My Esotericposted 2 weeks agoin reply to this

               Which innocent people did he harm?
               
               I suppose you could say he harmed ALL Americans because his last minute revelation of another line of inquiry on Clinton had a lot to do with Trump getting elected and taking America down with his corruption as president.

               replyreport
               1. 66

                  TheShadowSpecterposted 2 weeks agoin reply to this

                  The answer to your question is plain and simple.  Comey fell short of his call of duty to the American people by lying under oath during the Cross Hurricane hearings on the taxpayers' dime.  Now he has to face the music for it.  Federal prosecutors usually have a very high success rate at securing convictions, even against big shots like Comey.  If Comey weasels out of this one, he'll be extremely lucky if he does so.

                  replyreport
            2. 83

               Sharlee01posted 2 weeks agoin reply to this

               Jason,   I completely agree with this. From everything I’ve seen, James Comey crossed serious lines during his time leading the FBI, and accountability shouldn’t depend on political party. The Justice Department’s own Inspector General report from 2019 found that Comey violated FBI policy by leaking memos containing SENSITIVE government information, something that would have landed most federal employees in deep trouble. Beyond that, the way the FBI handled FISA warrants against Carter Page and the broader Russia investigation showed a complete disregard for fairness and transparency. Even people who aren’t Trump supporters should be able to recognize how dangerous it is when those in power bend the rules to target others. I think prosecution is the only way to restore trust in the system and prove that no one, not even former FBI directors, is above the law. He will have his day in court, and I, for one, hope to get answers.
               
               source on sensitive information---
               https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/29/politics … 20Politics

               replyreport
               1. 61

                  Willowarborposted 2 weeks agoin reply to this

                  The DOJ had "twice looked into Comey's alleged leaks during Trump's first term and declined to prosecute." A more recent "monthslong investigation earlier this year also reportedly failed to establish probable cause."
                  
                  Even "the acting U.S. Attorney in Virginia appointed by Trump apparently refused to prosecute," which was the basis Of trump's rage post to Pam.... There's no case here.
                  
                  Interesting how the same case gets reopened despite multiple investigations finding nothing. Political vendettas masquerading as justice...

                  replyreport
      2. 87

         My Esotericposted 3 weeks agoin reply to this

         He didn't. My money is on Comey and James making Bondi and Trump look like the fools that they are.

         replyreport
         1. 66

            TheShadowSpecterposted 3 weeks agoin reply to this

            But, see, if you watch a number of the videos on YouTube of the Cross Hurricane hearings, you'll see how corrupt the FBI has been for a long time and that James Comey was an instrumental part of that same corruption.  Sibel Edmonds and Coleen Rowley could both tell you that the FBI higher-ups are anything but honest.  Those two women were good, loyal employees of the FBI, and the FBI higher-ups destroyed their lives and threw them under the bus.  Robert S. Mueller III even promised Ms. Rowley that he would protect her from harm after she submitted her bombshell memorandum to him about how the FBI higher-ups mishandled 911 back when he was the FBI Director.  Anyone who has worked for the FBI in their situation can tell you that the FBI is nothing like the glamorous image that television shows and Hollywood have given it through the years.

            replyreport
   3. 87

      My Esotericposted 3 weeks agoin reply to this

      It is going to be a hoot watching Comey rip Trump apart in the political witch hunt. Now Leticia James will do the same.

      replyreport
2. 83

   Sharlee01posted 5 weeks ago

   It’s very likely that if the court sets bail, James Comey would be required to pay it—or more likely, have it posted through a surety or bond- before being released pending trial. Here’s the breakdown:
   
   Federal Practice: In federal felony cases, defendants are usually offered release on conditions such as posting bail, surrendering passports, or following travel restrictions, unless the court finds they are a flight risk or danger to the community.
   
   James Comey is facing two felony charges—making false statements to Congress and obstructing a congressional proceeding—but these are nonviolent offenses. By law, he could be taken into custody, but given his high-profile status, strong community ties, and lack of any flight risk, it’s highly unlikely. Most likely, the court will allow pretrial release with conditions, which could include posting bail, travel restrictions, and check-ins. If bail is required, he would either pay it or post a bond. This is standard procedure for federal cases like his.
   
   As of now, there is no publicly available mug shot of former FBI Director James Comey following his indictment on September 25, 2025. Reports indicate that Comey voluntarily surrendered to authorities, and while a booking photo may have been taken, it has not been released to the public.

   replyreport
   1. 87

      My Esotericposted 3 weeks agoin reply to this

      There are no mug shots because Comey wasn't booked like Trump was.

      replyreport
3. 61

   Willowarborposted 3 weeks ago

   Lol, this case is a house of cards and it's going to fall fast...

   replyreport
4. 61

   Willowarborposted 3 weeks ago

   In court filing, James Comey argues the Justice Dept has turned over only a single page of discovery records in his case
   
   Comey is filing motion to dismiss by Oct 20 and is seeking court order for document production by feds...
   
   Well this is unraveling quickly.
   
   

   replyreport
   1. 87

      My Esotericposted 3 weeks agoin reply to this

      It is only going to get worse for those incompetent fools in DOIJ.

      replyreport
5. 61

   Willowarborposted 2 weeks ago

   Dear MAGA,
   The James Comey case will collapse and when it does, you’ll cry “activist judge” instead of admitting the truth.
   
   This is what fascism looks like.
   
   Even trump’s own U.S. attorney in 2025 refused to prosecute Comey, saying there wasn’t even probable cause, let alone proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
   
   Now Trump has installed his former personal lawyer, Lindsey Halligan, to drag his political enemies into court. That’s not justice that’s weaponized prosecution....

   replyreport
6. 87

   My Esotericposted 2 weeks ago

   Doesn't it just BLOW your mind that an intelligent person can call, with a straight face, the ransacking and destruction of our Capitol with people threatening to KILL congress people and hang the vice president "peaceful" That is proof positive that person lives in an alternate reality.

   replyreport