The Justice Department reversed course on Thursday, asserting that the full grand jury did review the indictment of former FBI Director James Comey. The clarification came one day after lead prosecutor Lindsey Halligan told a judge that not all grand jurors had seen the final revised version of the charging document.
Federal prosecutors filed a notice on Thursday “correcting the record,” stating that the full grand jury reviewed the final revised indictment, which contained the two counts jurors voted to uphold against Comey. The filing appeared intended to clarify earlier statements and reinforce the validity of the charges.
Halligan wrote in the filing that “any assertion that the grand jury ‘never voted on the two-count indictment,’ is contradicted by the official transcript” declaring that the record leaves “no room for ambiguity.”
She noted the situation was simply a “clerical inconsistency” relating only to the nixed first count, insisting the remaining Comey indictment is valid.
However, a day earlier, both Halligan and Assistant U.S. Attorney Tyler Lemons told the court that the full grand jury had not seen the final version of the indictment. They said only the foreperson and one additional juror reviewed and signed the updated document.
According to their earlier account, prosecutors did not present the revised indictment to the full panel after jurors declined to uphold one of the original counts; instead, the foreperson signed the amended version without the remaining jurors reviewing it, The Hill reported.
Comey was indicted on September 25 on two federal counts, one for making false statements while testifying before Congress and the other for obstruction of justice, CNN reported.
The indictment accuses Comey of obstructing a congressional investigation into the disclosure of sensitive information in violation of 18 USC 1505. It also alleges that Comey made a false statement when he denied authorizing someone at the FBI to serve as an anonymous source to leak classified materials to outlets, including the New York Times.
The filing alleges that Comey authorized the leaks during the height of the Russia investigation, a period that has remained politically charged since his removal from office.
The case has intensified since the indictment was unveiled only days after President Trump announced he would appoint Halligan as the top prosecutor in the district.
When U.S. District Judge Michael Nachmanoff asked directly whether the final indictment was a document “never shown” to the full grand jury, Lemons responded that he had not been present but added, “yes, that is my understanding.”
The procedural error could jeopardize the case against Comey, who has pleaded not guilty to charges including making a false statement and obstructing Congress.
Comey’s attorneys have argued that the indictment should be dismissed, asserting that no valid indictment was ever returned and that the statute of limitations on the alleged offenses has therefore expired.
In a filing on Thursday, the defense said the discrepancy would form the basis of an upcoming motion to dismiss the charges.
Halligan has never previously led a criminal prosecution, The Hill noted.
During previous court proceedings, Nachmanoff, a Biden appointee, uncharacteristically questioned her role in the case, asking defense attorneys whether they believed Halligan was serving as a “puppet” or “stalking horse” for former President Trump.
In a statement to NBC News, Halligan said: “Personal attacks — like Judge Nachmanoff referring to me as a ‘puppet’ — don’t change the facts or the law.”
“The Judicial Canons require judges to be ‘patient, dignified, respectful, and courteous to litigants, jurors, witnesses, lawyers, and others with whom the judge deals in an official capacity’ … and to ‘act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary,’” she added.
“My focus remains on the record and the law, and I will continue to fulfill my responsibilities with professionalism,” she said.
