Skip to main content

Judicial Scrutiny Erupts in Comey Case After DOJ Admits Grand Jury Never Saw Final Indictment


WASHINGTON — The politically charged prosecution of former FBI Director James Comey has been thrown into turmoil after Justice Department (DOJ) prosecutors admitted in open court that the final version of the indictment was never presented to the full grand jury for approval.
The stunning admission, which occurred during a recent court hearing, has led to intense judicial scrutiny and raised serious questions about the integrity of the process under the Trump administration's DOJ.
The Procedural Breakdown
The controversy centers on a critical lapse in grand jury procedure. Prosecutors, led by a Trump-appointed U.S. Attorney, initially sought a three-count indictment against Mr. Comey. When the grand jury rejected one of those counts, prosecutors revised the charging document to include only the two remaining, approved counts (making a false statement and obstructing Congress).
During a hearing, DOJ attorneys conceded that this final, two-count document was not taken back to the full panel. Instead, only the foreperson signed the revised indictment before it was filed with the court.
The concession prompted a swift and forceful backlash from Mr. Comey’s defense team, who argued that without a full grand jury review, "there is no indictment Mr. Comey is facing."
Accusations of Misconduct
The acknowledgment of the procedural error came on the heels of a separate, blistering ruling from a federal magistrate judge. The judge ordered the highly unusual release of all grand jury materials to the defense team, citing a "disturbing pattern of profound investigative missteps."
In his ruling, the judge stated that the record "points to a disturbing pattern of profound investigative missteps, missteps that led an FBI agent and a prosecutor to potentially undermine the integrity of the grand jury proceeding." The judge also flagged "fundamental misstatements of the law" made by the prosecutor to the grand jury.
DOJ Attempts to Correct the Record
Following the concession in court, the DOJ filed a subsequent notice attempting to walk back the statement, calling the issue a "clerical inconsistency" and insisting that the charges had been properly approved.
However, the dueling accounts have only intensified the spotlight on the irregular nature of the prosecution. Mr. Comey has pleaded not guilty and is seeking to have the entire case dismissed, arguing that the prosecution is a vindictive extension of President Donald Trump’s personal animus toward him. The case remains ongoing as the court weighs the challenges to the indictment’s validity.

Reported by HARP ON THE TRUTH

Popular posts from this blog

📢 Social Media Statement: Defending Free Speech Against Surveillance

​ 🚨 ATTENTION: To any government agency or operative monitoring this account: ​I am an American Citizen. My activity on this platform is a direct exercise of my First Amendment right to Free Speech . ​ I am not organizing, promoting, or engaging in political violence. I am exercising my right to speak out about government actions, alleged corruption, and perceived abuse, and I maintain my right to attend PEACEFUL assemblies to advocate for change. ​Any attempt by a U.S. government entity (including law enforcement, intelligence agencies, or operatives using surveillance or fake accounts) to: ​ Spy on or track my lawful political speech. ​ Gather information to falsely claim a law is being broken. ​ Engage in entrapment based on my expression of dissent. ​...is a direct and illegal violation of my Constitutional rights. ​The recent National Security Presidential Memorandum NSPM-7 —which critics fear is redefining legitimate opposition as "domestic terrorism" an...
Read more

The Democratic Counter-Force: New Voices Rising Against the MAGA Movement

By M. Grey ​The political landscape is shifting. A powerful, outspoken coalition of liberal Democrats—from Congress to the cutting edge of digital media—is meeting the narratives of the MAGA movement with an unapologetic and aggressive defense of democratic ideals. They are the new voices of democracy, and they are not afraid to speak up. ​💥 Exposing the Engine of Influence: The Alleged MAGA Playbook ​A core mission of this counter-movement is to pull back the curtain on the tactics allegedly used to cultivate and sustain the movement's fervent base. Commentators argue that a calculating performance is broadcast to elicit emotional and financial returns from followers: ​ Lying on Camera: Systematically promoting demonstrable falsehoods to create a separate reality for their base. ​ Crying on Cue: Using manufactured moments of outrage or victimhood to generate sympathy and fervor. ​ The Follower Funding Machine: Sitting back as these performances allegedly prompt millions...
Read more

The $1 Billion Blunder: Did Melania Trump's Threat Just Hand Michael Wolff a Subpoena to the Epstein Files?

The $1 Billion Blunder: Did Melania Trump's Threat Just Hand Michael Wolff a Subpoena to the Epstein Files? NEW YORK, NY—In a legal escalation that has seized public attention, Michael Wolff, the author known for his disruptive books on the Trump administration, has flipped the script on Melania Trump's billion-dollar defamation threat, using the challenge as an immediate launching pad to demand sworn testimony about the Trumps' ties to Jeffrey Epstein.   The stunning turn of events stems from a legal letter sent by the former First Lady’s attorney, demanding Wolff retract and apologize for statements made in social media videos and a podcast. The claims centered on the assertion that Melania Trump was "very involved" in Epstein's social circle where she met her husband, and that the marriage was a "sham". The letter threatened a lawsuit for over $1 billion in damages, alleging the comments caused "overwhelming reputational and financial harm....
Read more