WASHINGTON (AP) — Lawyers for former FBI Director James Comey urged a judge Monday to dismiss the case against him, calling it a vindictive prosecution motivated by “personal animus” and orchestrated by a White House determined to seek retribution against a perceived foe of President Donald Trump.
The lawyers also called for the indictment’s dismissal due to what they described as the illegitimate appointment of the U.S. attorney who filed the case. This appointment occurred days after the attorney was hastily named to the job by Trump.
This two-pronged attack on the indictment, which accuses Comey of lying to Congress five years ago, represents the opening salvo in what is expected to be a protracted court fight ahead of a trial currently set for January 5.
The motions focus not on the substance of the allegations but rather on the unusual circumstances surrounding the prosecution. These include Trump exhorting his attorney general to bring charges against Comey and the administration’s abrupt installation of a White House aide to serve as the top prosecutor of the elite office overseeing the case.
“Bedrock principles of due process and equal protection have long ensured that government officials may not use courts to punish and imprison their perceived personal and political enemies,” wrote Comey’s defense team, which includes Patrick Fitzgerald, the former U.S. attorney in Chicago and a longtime Comey friend. “But that is exactly what happened here.”
They argued that the Justice Department brought the case due to Trump’s hatred of Comey. As FBI director in the first months of Trump’s first term, Comey infuriated the president through his oversight of an investigation into potential ties between Russia and Trump’s 2016 campaign. Trump fired Comey in May 2017.
The two have been open adversaries since then, with Comey labeling Trump “unethical” and comparing him to a mafia boss, while Trump has branded Comey an “untruthful slimeball” and called for him to be punished because of the Russia investigation.
“The government has singled out Mr. Comey for prosecution because of his protected speech and because of President Trump’s personal animus toward Mr. Comey,” defense lawyers wrote, adding that such a “vindictive and selective prosecution” violates multiple provisions of the Constitution and must be dismissed.
Comey’s defense team foreshadowed these arguments during his first and only court appearance in the case, where he pleaded not guilty.
Though motions alleging vindictive prosecutions do not often succeed, this one lays out a timeline of events intended to link Trump’s demands for prosecution with the Justice Department’s scramble to secure an indictment last month just before the statute of limitations was set to lapse.
Last month, Trump, in a Truth Social post directed to Attorney General Pam Bondi, complained that “nothing is being done” on investigations into some of his foes and called for action, specifically referencing inquiries into Comey, New York Attorney General Letitia James, and Democratic Sen. Adam Schiff of California. “JUSTICE MUST BE SERVED, NOW!!!” part of the message read.
Subsequently, Trump installed Lindsey Halligan, a White House aide who had been one of his personal lawyers but with no experience as a federal prosecutor, to run the Eastern District of Virginia. She replaced Erik Siebert, who had resigned as U.S. attorney one day earlier amid administration pressure to charge Comey and James. Comey was indicted days later.
Comey’s lawyers argued that the social media post represented an admission that the government was prosecuting Comey for “an impermissible discriminatory purpose.”
“For many years, President Trump has sought to prosecute or otherwise punish Mr. Comey because of overt hostility to Mr. Comey’s protected speech and because of his personal bias against Mr. Comey,” the attorneys said. “But despite President Trump’s yearslong campaign to prosecute Mr. Comey, no career or appointed prosecutor had ever agreed to do so. Thus, Mr. Trump made clear to his Attorney General that the only way to achieve ‘JUSTICE’ against Mr. Comey was by ousting Mr. Siebert and installing Ms. Halligan.”
In a separate motion, defense lawyers argued that the case was “fatally flawed” because Halligan was unlawfully appointed before signing the indictment late last month.
“The President and Attorney General appointed the President’s personal lawyer as interim U.S. Attorney in violation of a clear statutory command so that the interim U.S. Attorney could indict an outspoken critic of the President just days before the relevant statute of limitations was set to expire,” the lawyers stated.
That motion is expected to be heard by a different judge than the trial judge, U.S. District Court Judge Michael Nachmanoff.
Halligan is not the only U.S. attorney facing a court challenge. A federal appeals court in Philadelphia heard arguments Monday in a case challenging the tenure of Alina Habba as New Jersey’s top federal prosecutor. A panel of judges did not immediately rule but questioned the propriety of maneuvers meant to keep Habba in her job.
Separately on Monday, defense lawyers and prosecutors disputed in court filings a Justice Department suggestion that Fitzgerald might have to step aside. Prosecutors asserted late Sunday that Comey’s “lead defense counsel” had earlier been used by Comey to disclose classified information — a claim the defense team called “provably false” and defamatory.
https://whdh.com/news/comeys-lawyers-say-case-against-him-is-driven-by-trumps-personal-animus-and-must-be-thrown-out/
