Federal prosecutors investigating former FBI Director James Comey for allegedly making false statements to Congress decided {that a} central witness of their probe would show “problematic” and certain stop them from establishing their case to a jury, sources conversant in their findings informed ABC Information.
Daniel Richman — a regulation professor who prosecutors allege Comey approved to leak data to the press — informed investigators that the previous FBI director instructed him to not interact with the media on no less than two events and unequivocally mentioned Comey by no means approved him to offer data to a reporter anonymously forward of the 2016 election, the sources mentioned.
Comey, who was indicted final month on costs of constructing a false assertion and obstruction associated to 2020 testimony earlier than the Senate Judiciary Committee, is because of seem in a Virginia courtroom for the primary time for his arraignment Wednesday — however Justice Division officers have privately expressed that the case might rapidly unravel underneath the scrutiny of a federal choose and protection legal professionals.
Based on prosecutors who investigated the circumstances surrounding Comey’s 2020 testimony for 2 months, utilizing Richman’s testimony to show that Comey knowingly supplied false statements to Congress would lead to “doubtless insurmountable issues” for the prosecution.
Investigators detailed these conclusions in a prolonged memo final month recommending that the workplace not transfer ahead in charging Comey, in response to sources conversant in the memo’s contents.
Lindsey Halligan, a Trump loyalist hand-picked to exchange the U.S. legal professional for the Jap District of Virginia who resisted bringing prosecutions in opposition to Trump’s political foes, nonetheless moved ahead in presenting the case earlier than a grand jury in Alexandria, Virginia, and secured two out of three counts she sought in opposition to Comey over his 2020 congressional testimony.
Throughout grand jury proceedings, prosecutors haven’t any obligation to current proof favorable to a defendant — however such proof should be handed over to the defendant earlier than trial.
FBI Director James Comey speaks throughout a information convention, March 24, 2016 in Washington.
Alex Wong/Getty Photographs
Halligan’s deputy raised comparable considerations concerning the case the identical week the previous White Home aide-turned-prosecutor requested a grand jury to indict Comey, bolstering the conclusion that no single piece of proof might exhibit that Comey lied to Congress and warning in opposition to counting on Richman, who she described to colleagues as a hostile witness, sources mentioned.
Prosecutors additional expressed considerations concerning the division’s skill to take the case to trial rapidly as a consequence of issues figuring out all of the related supplies that might should be handed over to Comey’s legal professionals, sources mentioned. Additionally they raised alarms over the potential for Comey’s protection to quote the statute of limitations for the case, which derives from testimony in 2017 and was solely strengthened by Comey throughout his 2020 testimony in response to a query from Republican Sen. Ted Cruz.
Comey, who is predicted to plead not responsible to the costs, denies wrongdoing and has argued that he’s being focused for political causes. His indictment got here simply days after Trump’s unprecedented demand that his Justice Division act “now” to convey circumstances in opposition to the previous FBI director and others.
“Nothing is being finished. What about Comey, Adam ‘Shifty’ Schiff, and Leticia???” Trump wrote in a social media put up final month, immediately addressing Lawyer Normal Pam Bondi and referring to California Sen. Adam Schiff and New York Lawyer Normal Letitia James. “We will not delay any longer, it is killing our popularity and credibility. They impeached me twice, and indicted me (5 occasions!), OVER NOTHING. JUSTICE MUST BE SERVED, NOW!!!”
Halligan alleges that Comey deliberately misled Congress in 2017 and 2020 when he testified that he by no means approved one other particular person on the FBI to offer data to the media anonymously. The allegation is that Comey approved Richman to talk to the press anonymously, contradicting his testimony.
Trump later accused Comey of breaking the regulation by sharing his memos, arguing they contained categorised data, although Richman later informed ABC Information in a press release that not one of the paperwork had any classification markings.
When prosecutors met with Richman in September, he informed them that he by no means served as an nameless supply for Comey or acted at Comey’s route whereas he was FBI director, sources conversant in his interview informed ABC Information. In no less than two circumstances when Richman requested if he ought to communicate with the press, Comey suggested him not to take action, sources mentioned.
Investigators who reviewed materials from Comey’s emails, together with his correspondence with Richman, couldn’t establish an occasion when Comey permitted leaking materials to a reporter anonymously, sources informed ABC Information.
Richman, a longtime pal of Comey, has beforehand acknowledged his position as an middleman between Comey and reporters after Comey was fired from his position as FBI director, together with leaking memos written by Comey about his interactions with Trump following his termination.
Federal prosecutors have targeted their inquiry on Comey’s actions as FBI director — together with the alleged leak of details about the Trump and Clinton campaigns forward of the 2016 election — to search out proof that Comey deliberately mislead Congress.
As ABC Information beforehand reported, profession prosecutors within the workplace not solely decided that the huge quantity of proof they collected of their investigation can be inadequate to persuade a jury to convict him at a trial, however would additionally fail to fulfill a decrease commonplace of reaching possible trigger to even convey a case.
