COMEY CASE COLLAPSE?: The criminal case against former FBI Director James Comey was thrown into greater jeopardy after the Department of Justice (DOJ) admitted that the final indictment against him was never presented to the full grand jury.
The hearing Wednesday had been scheduled to focus on Comey’s motion to dismiss the case against him on accusations that he’s the victim of a selective and vindictive prosecution from Trump’s DOJ, but the revelation overshadowed the hearing’s focus.
The admission came out of sharp questioning from U.S. District Judge Michael Nachmanoff after several judges overseeing the case expressed concerns about the federal government’s presentation to the grand jury and an apparent discrepancy in the record.
The grand jury had rejected one of the counts that interim U.S. Attorney Lindsey Halligan sought against Comey while accepting the other two. But after the one count was rejected, Halligan gave the jury foreperson an updated version to sign that the other jury members didn’t see.
Michael Dreeban, an attorney for Comey, argued the apparent error should be a reason to dismiss the case because “no indictment was returned” from the grand jury.
Dreeban argued that would mean the statute of limitations had lapsed in the case, preventing any charges from being able to go forward. Comey has been accused of making false statements to Congress and obstruction stemming from testimony he gave in 2020.
The statute of limitations is five years, and the indictment was filed just before the deadline in September.
Nachmanoff didn’t make any immediate ruling.
The former FBI director's claim that he’s the victim of vindictive prosecution is just one of the arguments he’s making to try to get the case dismissed before his trial begins in January.
Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James (D), who has been charged in the same district in a separate case, argued last week that Halligan was improperly appointed as U.S. attorney and shouldn’t have been able to bring the cases originally.
A ruling is expected on that argument by Thanksgiving.
▪ The Washington Post: Comey case calls attention to secrecy of grand juries.
▪ ABC News: Trump’s words loom large over Comey prosecution.
LAWSUIT PROVISION REPEAL: The House voted unanimously Wednesday to repeal a provision from the bill reopening the government this month that allows senators to sue if their phone records were seized without notice, but the legislation has an uncertain future in the Senate.
The House voted 426-0 to repeal the last-minute addition to the funding bill after Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) and many other House members expressed frustration with it. The provision allows senators to sue the federal government for up to $500,000 in damages if their records were sought or seized without their knowledge.
It is retroactive to 2022, allowing more than a half-dozen senators whose records were sought as part of former special counsel Jack Smith’s investigation into the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol attack to take legal action.
Many senators have said they agree with their House colleagues in slamming the provision as corrupt, but Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) has shown little interest in repealing it, The Hill’s Al Weaver reports.
“That was a Senate-specific solution. The statute that was violated applied only to the Senate, which is why we addressed it the way that we did,” he told reporters.
Most of the senators whose records were obtained have said they won’t sue, but Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) has been vocal in vowing to seek damages from the DOJ and Verizon for turning over his records.
▪ The Hill: Senate provision could undermine future investigations into lawmakers.
WHAT’S NEXT ON EPSTEIN? Republican lawmakers are warning the White House against playing games on the Epstein files now that Congress has passed legislation requiring their disclosure, The Hill’s Alexander Bolton reports.
Trump signed the Epstein Files Transparency Act into law late Wednesday, officially directing the DOJ to release all unclassified records and documents connected to the convicted sex offender.
Reps. Thomas Massie (Ky.) and Marjorie Taylor Greene (Ga.), two of the Republicans leading the effort to pass the legislation, voiced concerns at a press conference ahead of the House vote Tuesday that the Trump administration would find a work-around to avoid disclosing the files.
The concerns mostly stem from Trump directing Attorney General Pam Bondi to investigate Epstein’s ties to top Democrats, including former President Clinton and former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers, and business leaders. Bondi confirmed she would open a probe and chose the acting U.S. attorney for the powerful Southern District of New York to oversee it.
Proponents of the files’ release fear the administration could argue the documents can’t be released because they are part of an ongoing investigation, even though Trump has signed the bill into law.
Bondi said Wednesday the DOJ would release additional Epstein files within 30 days, as the legislation requires.
“We will follow the law. The law passed both chambers,” she said. “We will continue to follow the law, again, while protecting victims but also providing maximum transparency.”
Still, Democrats and some Republicans are skeptical.
Even with Congress almost unanimously voting to release the files, the Epstein saga may not be over yet.
▪ The Hill: Who was the sole dissenter against the Epstein files release?
▪ The Hill: Summers steps down from OpenAI board.
▪ The Hill: Summers goes on leave at Harvard University.
