In this episode, we break down the latest developments in the high-profile James Comey case, including new arguments that the former FBI director is facing a vindictive prosecution driven by political pressure from former President Donald Trump. With a critical Nov. 19 hearing approaching, Comey’s lawyers are preparing to argue that the criminal charges should be dismissed due to political retaliation and selective enforcement.

We examine the core allegations: that Comey lied to Congress during a 2020 Senate testimony and obstructed a congressional proceeding. Prosecutors claim he knowingly denied authorizing an anonymous leak. But Comey’s team argues these charges only surfaced after Trump publicly declared he was “guilty as hell” and pressured the Justice Department to act before a looming legal deadline.

This episode also explores the controversy surrounding Lindsey Halligan, a former Trump lawyer suddenly appointed to a senior DOJ role despite no prosecutorial experience—just days before securing the indictment. We also review internal DOJ turmoil, including the departure of U.S. Attorney Erik Siebert after reportedly questioning the case.

Beyond vindictive prosecution, Comey is raising major concerns about selective prosecution, First Amendment retaliation, and potential grand jury irregularities that could undermine the entire indictment. A separate judge has already noted that these irregularities may be significant enough to dismiss the case altogether.

We analyze what Judge Michael Nachmanoff’s upcoming decisions could signal, how government attorneys are responding, and what this case means for the broader debate over Justice Department politicization.

Stay tuned for a clear, factual, and accessible breakdown of one of the most consequential legal fights of the year.
Listen till the end for expert insights on how this hearing could shape future DOJ investigations.

Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-political-current--6768289/support.