A dramatic legal maneuver unfolded Saturday, as a federal judge intervened to shield crucial evidence from federal prosecutors in the case against former FBI Director James Comey. The move throws a wrench into the government’s pursuit of a new indictment, intensifying a legal battle already steeped in controversy.
The catalyst for this intervention was Daniel Richman, a figure identified as a key media contact for Comey. Richman urgently sought to prevent the Justice Department from accessing his files, anticipating the Trump Administration’s renewed efforts to bring charges against the former FBI Director.
Comey faces two serious charges: false statements and obstruction of a congressional proceeding. These accusations stem from his 2020 testimony before the Senate, specifically regarding whether he authorized leaks of sensitive information to the press.
Newly revealed emails from November 2016 paint a potentially damaging picture. They suggest Comey wasn’t merely aware of leaks, but actively guided Richman in communicating with the media, effectively authorizing the dissemination of information.
This revelation directly challenges Comey’s defense that the prosecution is malicious. Evidence now suggests a deliberate strategy to shape public narrative through carefully placed media contacts, a strategy he previously denied.
Federal authorities had previously seized materials from Richman years ago. His recent legal action aimed to block the DOJ from examining those seized documents, arguing their relevance to the case against Comey.
US District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, appointed by President Clinton, granted a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) halting the DOJ’s access. The judge cited procedural concerns as the basis for her decision.
Specifically, the judge noted the absence of representation from the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia, and uncertainty regarding who currently holds custody of the seized materials. She also acknowledged the government had been notified of Richman’s motion, allowing them time to respond.
The TRO remains in effect until December 12th, or until the court decides otherwise. The DOJ has until December 9th to formally respond to Richman’s request and address the judge’s concerns.
In a separate, but related development, a federal judge dismissed the criminal cases against both James Comey and Letitia James last Monday. Judge Cameron McGowan Currie, also a Clinton appointee, found that the appointment of US Attorney Lindsey Halligan was unconstitutional.
The judge determined that Halligan’s appointment violated the Appointments Clause of the Constitution, and Attorney General Pam Bondi’s attempt to retroactively validate the appointment was deemed insufficient. This procedural flaw led to the dismissal of the charges.
However, this dismissal is far from a final victory for Comey. The Department of Justice is already preparing to refile charges, signaling a continued determination to pursue the case.
Interestingly, a grand jury in the Eastern District of Virginia declined to indict Letitia James earlier this week, adding another layer of complexity to the unfolding legal saga. The legal battles are far from over.
