Trump Comey INDICTMENT HEADED for DISMISSAL Already?!?!

Well, Donald Trump's not going to like the judge who was just appointed to preside over the James Comey indictment and prosecution. That's Michael Nachmaninoff, a former federal public defender, a Biden appointee, who also when he was a magistrate judge, had presided over the arraignment, therefore the criminal prosecution of two colleagues of Donald Trump and Rudy Giuliani, Lev Parnas and Igor Froman in a campaign finance criminal violation case where they went to jail

or at least Lev did. So I wanna catch you up on what we've learned since we got the original reporting that the handpicked non-prosecutor, inexperienced lawyer, Lindsey Halligan, who's never been inside of a federal courtroom

as far as I know, looks like she handled the actual indictment late night, which was an eye popping moment even for the magistrate judge on duty. She looks like she signed her own indictment. There are typos in it.

It is sloppy. I think I figured out why the grand jury did not indict on the first count of perjury. I think I know what a statement by James Comey that they're referring to in count two. I've got the video, I've got the clips,

I've got the overview of the judge. There's an arraignment in the middle of October. I pull it all together here to update you on this indictment here on Legal AF. Take a minute, hit the free subscribe button, help us continue to grow this community.

Let's catch up. James Comey, former FBI director, been on Donald Trump's crap list for a long, long time. Fired in 2016 or so, because Donald Trump gave him a loyalty test, and during that loyalty test, and will you drop the prosecution of Michael Flynn,

you know, who's involved with the Russia collusion? No, you're fired. And then when Donald Trump said, I'm going to go to, I hope there's audio recordings of it, almost like a threat to Comey, what he didn't know is Comey had memos

that he had prepared of that meeting and he released them through a friend of his who was a professor at Columbia, is still a professor at Columbia University, Daniel Richman. Daniel Richman has already been interviewed recently

by the Department of Justice and the FBI. He was the source of the leak to the New York Times about the memos and what really happened in that room. That's always stuck in the craw of Donald Trump. I don't think that Richman is necessarily the subject of the two perjury

counts. I'll go through them with you in a minute. But, you know, listen, Comey knew what he was up against originally against Donald Trump, and he's not going to give in. This is a guy whose daughter was fired, son-in-law was fired from the prosecutor's office in New York a month or so ago. His son-in-law just resigned from being a prosecutor in the Eastern District of Virginia. This is a family of proud civil servants, yeah?

Now look, I got my own issues with Comey. Many of us believe that the 2017 July press conference where Comey got up and said, we're gonna open up an investigation against Hillary Clinton. We're gonna refer to the Department of Justice

about her email servers, didn't really help her campaign against Donald Trump. Some of us blame her loss on Comey. But that doesn't mean I think he should be unfairly targeted and prosecuted for quote unquote perjury, staring down the barrel of five years

in a federal penitentiary. There are weaknesses in the indictment that I wanna go over with you. And I'm gonna show you the clips. First, let me show you the, let's get the indictment up on the screen.

I'll get it up here with you. And I wanna talk about the sloppiness, which I think will become the subject of a motion to dismiss the indictment. First of all, you have on page one, and these documents are unnumbered,

and Lindsey Halligan has two count twos. I mean, that's not necessarily the subject of an indictment to be dismissed, but it shows sloppy thinking all the way around. First of all, it's handwritten by the grand jury four person. I assume that's her handwriting.

They didn't even give her a typed form. James B. Comey Jr., she writes, on September 25th, I report that 12 or more grand jurors did not concur in finding an indictment in count one only. It's a weird form to use, it's not even the right form to use

to say that we indicted on two counts, but not on all three. But this is the form that she used, and then she signed it. So we start with that peculiarity. Then we go to the indictment. As I said, no page numbers.

And as you can see, we'll scroll here. There's a count one, there's a count two, and there's a count two. So, got problems there. Count one, I'm gonna translate some of these person ones and person twos for you. There's also

some sloppy person threes. This one that the jury didn't, grand jury did not indict over, says that on September 30th, 2020, when Comey testified from his home in Virginia, hence the Virginia connection, because it was COVID, that he made a materially false or fictitious or fraudulent statement that he did not remember being taught of person ones, I think that's a typo,

approval of a plan concerning person two and the 2016 US presidential election. Okay, let me translate that. There was an exchange between Senator Lindsey Graham and Comey about whether person one is Hillary Clinton, whether Hillary Clinton approved of a plan concerning person two, which is Donald Trump and the 2016 election. Here's the clip.

Seventh, 2016, the US intelligence officials forwarded an investigative referral of FBI to FBI Director James Comey, and Assistant Director of counterintelligence Peter struck regarding US presidential candidate Hillary Clinton's approval of a plan concerning US presidential candidate Donald Trump and Russian hackers hampering US elections

as a means of distracting the public from her use of a private email server. You don't remember getting that or being taught? Okay, well that's a pretty stunning thing it didn't ring a bell but it did come to you. Let's just end with this. You get this inquiry from the intelligence committee to look at the Clinton campaign basically trying to create a distraction accusing Trump of being a Russian agent or a Russian stooge or whatever to distract from her email server problems.

And how far-fetched is that Mr. Comey when we now know that the Democratic Party through Fusion GPS hired Christopher Still a foreign agent who had a very strong bias against Trump who hired a Russian sub source who the FBI believed to be a Russian spy to compile a dossier that was a bunch of crap to be used against an American citizen working for the Trump campaign. You already knew that seems to me you'd want to investigate

other allegations but you're telling me that you don't recall this. I'm sorry Senator is there a question? Yes you don't recall this inquiry I just read about September the 2016. Now as I said said, it doesn't sound familiar.

Do you remember being told?

It doesn't sound familiar.

Do you remember?

Now, when you have a I don't recall, I don't remember, and I don't remember, then it's very hard to get perjury, as you can see. Here, the grand jury had a problem, I'm sure, with the second paragraph, which is that statement and representations were false because Comey then

and there knew he had in fact been provided information. It's very hard to prove somebody had or did or didn't see a memo. He says he doesn't remember the memo. That should be sufficient. No, that's perjury. You must remember the memo. How do you convict on that either? Remember, before I get to the other counts, Lindsay Halligan has no prosecutorial experience. She's been an eight-year lawyer.

I've looked it up. I'm not even sure she's a member of any federal bar. She's never been a federal prosecutor. Her career prosecutors at the office told her not to bring this case, that it violated the Department of Justice manual.

It violated the principles of federal prosecution, that she cannot sustain a conviction, nor does she have reasonable belief or probable cause to believe she can sustain a conviction all the way up through appeal. And she didn't care because her boss told her to bring the indictment, so she brought the indictment.

And I think she did it herself, because she actually signed the indictment herself without having a career prosecutor next to her to do it for her, or to handle the matter for her. For all I know, she presented the case, which would be really weird. And all she had on her shoulder, on her elbow, was Meg Cleary, who also has very limited experience. That was another pick by Pam Bondi. Look,

the reporting is Pam Bondi told Donald Trump that there's not a strong case here. He didn't care. This is a guy who got indicted himself, so he doesn't care about indictments. So that's what count one has to do about. You just saw the clip. You can see why there was problems with that when they played that clip, obviously,

in the jury room, the grand jury room. Let's go to count two, and I'll translate that and show you the clip of what I think that refers to. Count two, on or about September 30th, 2020, in the same testimony, Comey lied effectively by falsely stating to a US Senator during the committee hearing that James Comey had not authorized someone else at the FBI to be an anonymous source in news reports regarding an FBI investigation concerning person one.

Person one is Hillary Clinton, nothing to do with Trump. Person three, who they should have labeled here in paragraph four, shows up in the next paragraph. I believe person three is Andrew McCabe, Andy McCabe, who used to be the number two

in the FBI that worked under Comey. And so, and that the Senator that we're talking about is Senator Cruz. So an exchange between Senator Cruz and Comey about whether he authorized Andy McCabe to leak a report. I think it's the 2016 Wall Street Journal article,

which we'll put up on the screen, about Hillary Clinton and the FBI opening an investigation there. Look at Donald Trump try to benefit from Hillary Clinton being the source or being the target of an investigation that did not do well for her campaign, like the email servers or the rest. And he's trying to benefit from it here and got an indictment out of a grand jury. Let's play the clip of Cruz and Comey.

Did Russian asset. All right, let's shift to another topic. On May 3rd, 2017, in this committee, Chairman Grassley asked you point blank, quote, have you ever been an anonymous source in news reports about matters relating to the Trump investigation

or the Clinton investigation? You responded under oath, quote, never. He then asked you, quote, have you ever authorized someone else at the FBI to be an anonymous source in news reports about the Trump investigation

or the Clinton administration? You responded again under oath, no. Now, as you know, Mr. McCabe, who works for you, has publicly and repeatedly stated that he leaked information to the Wall Street Journal and that you were directly aware of it

and that you directly authorized it. Now, what Mr. McCabe is saying and what you testified to this committee cannot both be true. One or the other is false. Who's telling the truth?

I can only speak to my testimony. I stand by what the testimony you summarized

that I gave in May of 2017.

So your testimony is you've never authorized anyone to leak. And Mr. McCabe, if he says contrary, is not telling the truth, is that correct? Again, I'm not going to characterize Andy's testimony, but mine is the same today. All right, I'm going to make a final point because my time has expired. This investigation of the president was corrupt. The FBI and the Department of Justice were politicized and weaponized.

And in my opinion, there are only two possibilities. That you were deliberately corrupt or woefully incompetent. And I don't believe you were incompetent. This has done severe damage to the professionals and the honorable men and women at the FBI, because law enforcement should not be used as a political weapon.

And that is the legacy you've left.

Senator.

He says, you know, McCabe has said that he was the source to the Wall Street Journal for the 2016 article. It's just this link between whether he did it because he was directed to do it by Comey or not. So that's what Cruz is getting at. Well, is McCabe lying? I don't know if he's lying, but I certainly

don't remember telling him. Again, it's a memory test. I don't remember telling him I stand by my testimony. I was not the source of the leak, nor did I have McCabe leaked to the Wall Street Journal, this particular article. It's a very odd and problematic indictment count to to get a conviction on with a jury. Because it's obvious that you would argue, look, this wasn't a lie. He answered the question to the best of his ability.

We know that McCabe leaked the story to the Wall Street Journal. And he's not, and you can't prove that he's lying when he doesn't remember that, or he says he didn't. McCabe's memory may be different. This is a memory test. But this is not a fact upon which perjury can be, you can obtain a conviction. And then finally on the last count, they've got the overall obstruction of a congressional proceeding. This was crossfire hurricane to try to get to the bottom of the Russia collusion, and

that this somehow impeded. I'm not even sure how those statements impeded a congressional proceeding by giving that truthful answer. So if I'm the lawyer, and we have an arraignment now that's coming up in October for Comey, where he can plead his case, he's going to plead innocent. Here's a clip from last night of Comey saying he's not going to live on his knees. Let's play that clip.

We just got a video that has been posted, I believe, to Instagram by James Comey, of course, the former FBI director who has just been indicted. I think we have that ready to roll if you want to just take a look.

My family and I have known for years that there are costs to standing up to Donald Trump, but we couldn't imagine ourselves living any other way. We will not live on our knees, and you shouldn't either. Somebody that I love dearly recently said that fear is the tool of a tyrant, and she's right.

But I'm not afraid, and I hope you're not either. I hope instead you are engaged, you are paying attention, and you will vote like your beloved country depends upon it, which it does. My heart is broken for the Department of Justice, but I have great confidence in the federal judicial system

and I'm innocent. So let's have a trial and keep the faith. If I'm the defense lawyers, I would file a almost immediate motion to dismiss this indictment for the reasons that I've laid out here,

for the fact that this does not state a crime under law, that if those are the, you play those clips for the judge, Judge Nachmaninoff, and you move for an early indictment, even if you don't get the indictment this early, you have to start your PR campaign now because Comey's already getting bashed mercilessly by Pam Bondi and Cash Patel and Donald Trump. He's a liar, he's corrupt, he's a cheater,

no one's above the law. I mean, all this stuff that makes it difficult for Comey to get a fair trial, even in the Eastern District of Virginia. So that's what I would do. We're gonna continue to follow this a fast moving story. There could be developments, including over the weekend.

You know where to get those updates. Legal AF Substack, come over there. We're building a great parallel community here. You wanna be a card carrying member of Legal AF? Legal AF the podcast, Legal AF the YouTube channel, right here, hit the subscribe button.

We have no outside investors. And then Legal AF, the Substack Live and Substacks. So become a paid member there. And now you're protecting independent media the way that we hope that you would. So until my next report, I'm Michael Popock.

I'm Michael Popock, and I got some big news for our audience. Most of you know me as the co-founder of Midas Touch's Legal AF and the Legal AF YouTube channel, or as a 35-year national trial lawyer.

Now building a what we started together on Legal AF, I've launched a new law firm, the Popak Firm, dedicated to obtaining justice through compassionate and zealous legal representation. At the Popak Firm, we are focused on obtaining justice for those who have been injured or damaged

by a life-altering event, by securing the highest dollar recoveries. I've been tirelessly fighting for justice for the last 35 years, so my own law firm organically building on my legal AF work just feels right.

And I've handpicked a team of top-tier trial fighters and settlement experts throughout all 50 states known as Big Auto injury attorneys who have the know-how to beat heartless insurance companies, corporations, government entities, and their attorneys. Big Auto's attorneys working with my firm

are rock stars in their respective states and collectively responsible for billions of dollars in recoveries. So if you were a loved one, but on the wrong side of a catastrophic auto, motor vehicle, ride share, or truck accident, suffered a personal injury, or been the victim of medical malpractice, employment harassment or discrimination, or suffered a violation of your civil and constitutional rights, then contact the Popak firm today at 1-877-POPAK-AF,

or by visiting my website at www.thepopakfirm.com and fill out a free case evaluation form. And if we determine that you have a case and you sign with us, we don't get paid unless you do. The Popak Firm, fighting for your justice The Popak Firm, fighting for your justice

every step of the way.