Tag: lindsey halligan
Celebrated Former US Attorney Will Defend Comey Against Trump's Toy Prosecutor

Celebrated Former US Attorney Will Defend Comey Against Trump's Toy Prosecutor

Lindsey Halligan — who is President Donald Trump's new acting U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia — will be facing a particularly tough opponent on the other side of the courtroom in former FBI Director James Comey's pending criminal trial.

On Thursday, Politico reported that Comey has officially retained former U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald as his defense attorney, who led the Department of Justice's operations in the Northern District of Illinois for more than a decade. Fitzgerald successfully prosecuted multiple high-profile cases, securing convictions against former Illinois Governors Rod Blagojevich (D) and George Ryan (R), as well as media mogul Conrad Black.

As an assistant U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, Fitzgerald also prosecuted al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, Egyptian terrorist Omar Abdel-Rahman and Pakistani terrorist Ramzi Yousef for the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. And while Comey was FBI director, he appointed Fitzgerald to oversee the investigation into the Valerie Plame affair during former President George W. Bush's administration.

Halligan's indictment of Comey is just two pages long, and her signature is the only one on the official charging documents (which are typically signed by several career DOJ prosecutors in addition to the U.S. attorney overseeing the case). Halligan has no prior experience as a prosecutor, and practiced insurance law before Trump put her on his legal team in his classified documents case (which Trump-appointed U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon later threw out). The grand jury she convened for Comey didn't return an indictment on one of the three charges she recommended.

Several legal experts and commentators argued that Halligan will have an exceedingly difficult road ahead in her goal of convicting Comey on multiple felony counts. Former U.S. attorney Joyce Vance wrote on X that Fitzgerald is "one of the most highly regarded former DOJ officials."

"Interestingly enough, it was James Comey who appointed Patrick Fitzgerald to investigate the exposure of the CIA's Valerie Plame," MSNBC columnist Steve Benen wrote on Bluesky. "Fitzgerald then prosecuted Scooter Libby ... who was ultimately pardoned by Trump ... who's now prosecuting Comey ... who'll be represented by Fitzgerald."

Legal journalist Chris Geidner, who writes the "Law Dork" newsletter on Substack, pointed out that Trump's DOJ also has a significant obstacle in the form of U.S. District Judge Michael Nachmanoff — an appointee of former President Joe Biden who served as a federal public defender prior to his nomination to the federal judiciary.

"So it's going to be the tough-as-nails, highly experienced former U.S. attorney Patrick Fitzgerald vs a twice-failed Miss Colorado contestant — who worked in the insurance industry and has never prosecuted anything — in the Comey case? What a time to be alive," author Mollie Katzen wrote.

"This may backfire on Trump," one X user observed.

Reprinted with permission from Alternet.

The Bitter Ironies Behind Trump's Tyrannical Indictment Of James Comey

The Bitter Ironies Behind Trump's Tyrannical Indictment Of James Comey

For principled critics of James Comey, the fraudulent and politicized indictment of him issued by a federal grand jury in Virginia yesterday is wrapped in layers of bitter irony. It would be entirely fair to suggest that the former FBI director brought this illegitimate prosecution upon himself.

His new predicament is only one facet of the unfolding national disaster instigated by his actions in October 2016. In those days before a presidential election, he made a fateful decision to disclose a renewed FBI probe of Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton and “her emails” (which ultimately proved to contain no classified information, as the Trump administration officially acknowledged many months later). It was a choice that violated Justice Department rules, legal ethics, and has permanently damaged the institutions of law he claimed to be protecting.

Yet however dismal Comey’s own conduct may have been, and however culpable he remains in the rise o, the Justice Department’s fraudulent attempt to jail him on direct orders from Trump is an historic assault on the liberty of all Americans and must be resisted as such. Although he isn’t the first victim of Trump’s drive for authoritarian power and won’t be the last, the Comey case represents a stark departure from American standards of justice and an unmistakable step toward tyranny.

Trump warned the country many times that he would abuse presidential power for “retribution” against his adversaries and critics, and – unlike his admired predecessor Richard Nixon – he made no effort to conceal what he is doing to get Comey and others. When Erik Siebert, the Trump-appointed US attorney in the Eastern District of Virginia refused to prosecute Comey, the president forced him to resign.

Trump instantly replaced Siebert with Lindsey Halligan, a pliant White House attorney with no relevant qualifications for the job. She does display the abject subservience and ideological extremism required by her boss. Within days of her appointment, and just before the statute of limitations expired, Halligan delivered the two-page indictment of Comey.

In that tissue-thin bill of particulars, the Trump Justice Department charges Comey with lying to a Senate committee about a press leak from the FBI’s top echelons. Although the indictment cites no evidence whatsoever, its lynchpin appears to be an alleged contradiction between Comey’s sworn testimony that he never “authorized” such a leak, and the testimony of his former deputy Andrew McCabe that he did. But as several experts have noted, there may be no conflict between their narratives of that incident.

Except that may not even be the matter at issue. The rushed indictment is so vague that legal experts have been arguing over its actual meaning ever since its public release. Nobody seems to know precisely what Comey said that is alleged to have been false. That’s a fatal flaw in a perjury indictment, where precision is mandatory.

Among the underlying ironies is that McCabe’s 2016 leak to the Wall Street Journal involved an investigation of the Clinton Foundation, which came to nothing as such probes inevitably do. His aim was to dispel rumors, spread by conservative FBI agents seeking to sabotage the Clinton campaign, that the FBI had buried the foundation probe for political reasons.

Subsequent investigations forced McCabe to admit responsibility for that leak, which violated FBI and Justice Department rules, especially in the months before an election. Those extensive probes – by Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz and later by Trump’s own Russia special counsel John Durham – both found no basis to charge Comey or McCabe with any crime, while casting doubt on McCabe’s credibility. Horowitz and Durham had plenty of criticisms of the former FBI executives, but then again so do I.

Under those circumstances -- with all the glaring proof of Trump’s unlawful meddling -- the chances that Comey will be convicted, or even go to trial, seem small unless the courts abandon legality and abdicate to fascist rule. Even if the indictment is vacated, this rogue president will have inflicted severe costs not only on his “enemy,” but on the country whose Constitution he falsely swore to uphold.

Joe Conason is founder and editor-in-chief of The National Memo. He is also editor-at-large of Type Investigations, a nonprofit investigative reporting organization formerly known as The Investigative Fund. His latest book is The Longest Con: How Grifters, Swindlers and Frauds Hijacked American Conservatism (St. Martin's Press, 2024).

Trump Begs Gullible Donors For Money To 'Sue' CNN Over The  Big Lie

Trump Begs Gullible Donors For Money To 'Sue' CNN Over The  Big Lie

Barely two months after the House Select Committee took Donald Trump to task for conning his supporters out of $250 million for non-existent election-related litigation, the former president is at it again, begging followers to fund a meritless lawsuit against CNN that has yet to materialize.

On Friday, Trump pelted his supporters with emails pleading for donations to fund his “impending lawsuit” against the cable network for calling him a “liar” due to his persistent promotion of debunked claims of voter fraud in the 2020 presidential elections, according to The Daily Beast.

“I’m calling on my best and most dedicated supporters to add their names to stand with me in my impending lawsuit against fake news CNN,” wrote Trump in the email, captioned “Let’s SUE CNN”.

“Add your name immediately to show your support for my upcoming lawsuit against fake news CNN.”

The email concluded with a link that directs visitors to the ex-president’s donation portal, mirroring previous fundraising emails.

In a second email sent hours after the first, Trump wrote: “I’m going to look over the names of the first 45 Patriots who added their names to publicly stand with their President AGAINST CNN.”

The fundraising emails come after attorneys for Trump, who is still obsessing over his loss in the 2020 election, issued a 282-page document to CNN demanding the retraction of such terms as “the big lie” and “lying” from its coverage of his voter fraud election claims.

“Failure to publish such a correction, apology, or retraction will result in the filing of a lawsuit and damages being sought against you, CNN,” Trump’s attorneys wrote in the letter.

In a statement July 27, Trump expressed his intent to go after “other media outlets” that called him out for spreading bogus election fraud conspiracies. "I will also be commencing actions against other media outlets who have defamed me and defrauded the public regarding the overwhelming evidence of fraud throughout the 2020 Election," Trump wrote. "I will never stop fighting for the truth and for the future of our Country!"


Multiple investigations at varying levels of government across dozens of states -- as well as a probe by former Attorney General William Barr -- yielded no plausible evidence of widespread election fraud in the 2020 elections, yet Trump’s attorneys defended their client’s insistence on the Big Lie.

“... President Trump’s comments [regarding the 2020 election] are not lies: He subjectively believes that the results of the 2020 presidential election turned on fraudulent voting activity in several key states,” wrote the former president’s legal team.

Perhaps encouraged by the recent strings of election deniers’ victories in recent Republican primaries, a Florida lawyer for Trump, Lindsey Halligan, also threatened July 29 on Steve Bannon’s War Room podcast to sue CNN for describing Trump as “a liar.”

“CNN branded Trump as a liar, and referred to his questions regarding voter fraud as ‘the big lie,’ which is actually linked to Adolf Hitler,” Halligan told Bannon.

However, prominent commentators have ridiculed Trump’s threat to sue CNN for dafamation. Writing for the Chicago Tribune, Steve Chapman opined, "You don't need to have passed the bar exam to know that no one at CNN will lose sleep over his demand that the network "publish a full and fair correction, apology, or retraction" of dozens of statements accusing him of a cynical campaign of deceit. Trump is more likely to win the Olympic decathlon than to prevail in this dispute."

Shop our Store

Headlines

Editor's Blog

Corona Virus

Trending

World