Judge Critiques Justice Department’s Investigation into Indictment of James Comey

WASHINGTON — A federal judge has condemned the Justice Department’s investigation that led to the indictment of former FBI Director James Comey, stating there was a “disturbing pattern of profound investigative missteps.” Magistrate Judge William Fitzpatrick ordered prosecutors to share all grand jury materials with defense lawyers as part of the ruling on Monday.

Fitzpatrick noted several issues, including “fundamental misstatements of the law” and the use of potentially privileged communications during the investigation. He said these missteps might have undermined the integrity of the grand jury proceedings.

“The relief sought by the defense is rarely granted,” Fitzpatrick wrote, but added that the situation indicated serious concerns about the case’s legitimacy. This ruling represents one of the most aggressive critiques of the Justice Department’s actions regarding the Comey indictment.

James Comey was indicted on charges of lying to Congress in September 2020. His attorneys argue that his statement was misinterpreted, suggesting that the question posed by Senator Ted Cruz was vague, leading to confusion in his response. Comey allegedly indicated he did not authorize FBI leaks to the media, although prosecutors claim he allowed a close friend to act as an anonymous source to reporters.

Similarly, New York Attorney General Letitia James faces scrutiny, with both defendants questioning the legality of the prosecutor’s appointment. Lindsey Halligan, who led the case against both Comey and James, was appointed at the behest of former President Donald Trump, which defense lawyers assert undermines the charges.

Halligan’s qualifications are being challenged, as she was a former White House aide and lacked prosecutorial experience. Defense lawyers argue that her appointment was part of a broader effort to pursue political adversaries of Trump.

The judge highlighted irregularities in the grand jury’s transcript, which triggered concerns about potential misconduct by the government, stating, “The procedural and substantive irregularities may rise to the level of government misconduct.”

The prosecution defends the indictment, claiming that it was properly returned by the grand jury despite the questions surrounding Halligan’s appointment. The outcome of this ruling may significantly impact the cases against Comey and James.

Both former public officials have pleaded not guilty, asserting that the charges are motivated by political animus rather than legitimate legal concerns. Comey’s fraught history with Trump includes accusations of ethical violations, while James has also faced Trump’s criticisms following a ruling against the Trump Organization for financial misconduct.