Comey prosecutor bashes judge for claiming the indictment was mishandled

U.S. Attorney Lindsey Halligan on Thursday lashed out at a federal judge who has been picking apart her criminal case against former FBI Director James B. Comey.

Ms. Halligan submitted new documents in U.S. District Court that she said show Judge Michael Nachmanoff was wrong in stating the grand jury did not review the final charges against Mr. Comey.

Her office also accused Judge Nachmanoff, a Biden appointee, of launching a personal attack on her after he suggested at a hearing earlier this week that she was serving as “a puppet” or “stalking horse” for President Trump.

“A federal judge should be neutral and impartial. Instead, this judge launched an outrageous and unprofessional personal attack yesterday in open court against U.S. Attorney Lindsey Halligan,” said Justice Department spokesperson Chad Gilmartin.

In the filing, Ms. Halligan provided court transcripts showing the grand jury foreperson acknowledged the secret panel had reviewed and voted on the two-count indictment against Mr. Comey.

“The transcript leaves no room for ambiguity,” Ms. Halligan wrote. “The complete record eliminates any doubt. The foreperson confirmed the vote, the Court acknowledged the vote [and] at least twelve jurors” agreed to indict Mr. Comey on the two counts.

Ms. Halligan has been under fire by critics who accuse her of legal missteps that have imperiled the case.

A grand jury indicted Mr. Comey on Sept. 25 on charges of making a false statement to Congress and obstructing a congressional proceeding. The charges stem from Mr. Comey’s 2020 testimony at a Senate hearing, where he denied leaking classified material to the media regarding his 2016 investigation into the missing government emails of then-presidential candidate and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Mr. Comey pleaded not guilty and his team of lawyers tried to get the charges thrown out, arguing Ms. Halligan was improperly appointed and the charges are a politically motivated and “vindictive.”

Ms. Halligan countered by entering Mr. Comey’s handwritten notes indicated an associate leaked classified information to the media on his behalf, and that he expected to work for the Clinton White House if she won the 2016 election.

Judge Nachmanoff raised new questions about the validity of the case on Wednesday when he asked prosecutors whether the grand jury had seen all of the charges in the case. Ms. Halligan answered that only the jury foreperson and one other grand juror saw a revised two-count indictment that came after the grand jury declined a third charge.

Documents Ms. Halligan filed Thursday sought to correct the record and show that the entire grand jury reviewed and voted on the two charges.

Mike Davis, who runs the anti-lawfare group, Article III Project, said confusion on the matter stemmed from Judge Nachmanoff’s “misinterpretation” of an administrative move to strip one of the counts from the indictment after the grand jury rejected it.

“The adjustment simply reflected the grand jury’s vote. It was neither unusual nor improper,” he said.

Ms. Halligan is facing fire from three different judges in the case.

Earlier this week, Magistrate Judge William Fitzpatrick ordered prosecutors to take the unusual step of providing all grand jury materials from the case to the defense lawyers. Judge Fitzpatrick accused the Justice Department of engaging in “a disturbing pattern of profound investigative missteps,” while seeking the indictment against Mr. Comey. Ms. Halligan has filed a motion to block the release of the grand jury information, arguing Judge Fitzpatrick “may have misinterpreted some facts.”

Last month, Mr. Comey’s lawyers asked U.S. District Judge Cameron McGowan Currie, a Clinton appointee, to throw out charges because Ms. Halligan’s appointment to serve as interim U.S. attorney is illegal because her predecessor had already served past the 120-day limit for temporary appointees. Judge Currie intends to rule on the matter by Thanksgiving.