Trump Demanded Charges Against Comey. Five Days Later, His Former Lawyer Obtained Them.

Select a Section to Explore

Chapter 1 — Trump Named the Target and the Prosecutor

Chapter 2 — An Indictment Brought Without Lawful Authority

Chapter 3 — The Defense and the Abuse of Public Trust

1 · Trump Named the Target and the Prosecutor

1 · Trump Named the Target and the Prosecutor — select a subtopic

1.1 — A Presidential Demand, Followed by an Indictment

1.2 — Trump Claimed the Prosecutor's Firing

1 · Trump Named the Target and the Prosecutor

1.1 · Trump Named the Target and the Prosecutor

A Presidential Demand, Followed by an Indictment

Trump publicly demanded action against James Comey, selected Lindsey Halligan and later formally nominated her. His attorney general installed her two days later; she obtained a two-count indictment three days after that. The charge is that Trump turned federal prosecution into retaliation, pursuing a named adversary after claiming he had fired the prosecutor who said there was no case.

Post on Truth Social addressed to Attorney General Pam Bondi, reproduced in Comey's Motion to Dismiss (ECF 59)

Pam: I have reviewed over 30 statements and posts saying that, essentially, “same old story as last time, all talk, no action. Nothing is being done. What about Comey, Adam “Shifty” Schiff, Leticia??? They’re all guilty as hell, but nothing is going to be done.” Then we almost put in a Democrat supported U.S. Attorney, in Virginia, with a really bad Republican past. A Woke RINO, who was never going to do his job. That’s why two of the worst Dem Senators PUSHED him so hard. He even lied to the media and said he quit, and that we had no case. No, I fired him, and there is a GREAT CASE, and many lawyers, and legal pundits, say so. Lindsey Halligan is a really good lawyer, and likes you, a lot. We can’t delay any longer, it’s killing our reputation and credibility. They impeached me twice, and indicted me (5 times!), OVER NOTHING. JUSTICE MUST BE SERVED, NOW!!! President DJT.

Donald J. Trump, President of the United States · September 20, 2025, 6:44 p.m. ET

Read the full chapter — all the detail, fully footnoted →

Sources

[1]Motion to Dismiss for Vindictive and Selective Prosecution, United States v. Comey, No. 1:25-cr-00272 (E.D. Va. ECF No. 59)

[2]Katherine Faulders, Alexander Mallin and Peter Charalambous, ABC News, 'Prosecutors' memo to new US attorney found no probable cause to charge James Comey: Sources' (Sept. 25, 2025)

[3]Opinion & Order granting the motion to dismiss, United States v. Comey, No. 1:25-cr-00272 (E.D. Va. ECF No. 213, Nov. 24, 2025) (Currie, Sr. U.S.D.J., sitting by designation)

[4]Opening Brief for the United States, United States v. James and United States v. Comey, Nos. 25-4673 and 25-4674 (4th Cir. Feb. 9, 2026)

[5]Indictment, United States v. Comey, No. 1:25-cr-00272 (E.D. Va. ECF No. 1, Sept. 25, 2025)

[6]Motion to Dismiss for Unlawful Appointment (Appointments Clause / 28 U.S.C. § 546), United States v. Comey, No. 1:25-cr-00272 (E.D. Va. ECF No. 60)

[7]Andrew Goudsward, Reuters, 'Judges question DOJ bid to revive cases against Trump foes Comey, James' (Sept. 15, 2026), reproduced by Internazionale

1.2 · Trump Named the Target and the Prosecutor

Trump Claimed the Prosecutor's Firing

The prosecutor Trump said he fired, Erik Siebert, was Trump's own nominee for U.S. attorney, and the district's judges had appointed him to continue in office. He left the day before Trump's demand, after raising concerns about charges, according to reporting summarized by Judge Currie. Trump's post said Siebert had told the media there was no case, and claimed the firing.

Read the full chapter — all the detail, fully footnoted →

Sources

[1]Motion to Dismiss for Vindictive and Selective Prosecution, United States v. Comey, No. 1:25-cr-00272 (E.D. Va. ECF No. 59)

[2]Katherine Faulders, Alexander Mallin and Peter Charalambous, ABC News, 'Prosecutors' memo to new US attorney found no probable cause to charge James Comey: Sources' (Sept. 25, 2025)

[3]Opinion & Order granting the motion to dismiss, United States v. Comey, No. 1:25-cr-00272 (E.D. Va. ECF No. 213, Nov. 24, 2025) (Currie, Sr. U.S.D.J., sitting by designation)

[4]Opening Brief for the United States, United States v. James and United States v. Comey, Nos. 25-4673 and 25-4674 (4th Cir. Feb. 9, 2026)

[8]Senate Judiciary Committee Democrats (Durbin et al.), letter to Attorney General Pamela Bondi re: the Eastern District of Virginia (Sept. 26, 2025)

2 · An Indictment Brought Without Lawful Authority

2 · An Indictment Brought Without Lawful Authority — select a subtopic

2.1 — Three Days in Office, Two Felony Counts

2.2 — The Court Set the Indictment Aside

2.3 — The Indictment Failed, and DOJ Sought to Restore It

2 · An Indictment Brought Without Lawful Authority

2.1 · An Indictment Brought Without Lawful Authority

Three Days in Office, Two Felony Counts

Bondi appointed Lindsey Halligan, Trump's selected replacement and former personal lawyer with no prosecutorial experience, on September 22, 2025. Three days later she obtained two felony counts over Comey's congressional testimony about authorizing media disclosures. Trump later formally nominated her. Jurors approved those counts in an original three-count draft, but Magistrate Judge William E. Fitzpatrick later questioned whether the revised indictment went before the full grand jury. Comey challenged it on that ground; Currie left the issue undecided. Comey's lawyers also argued that the indictment misrepresented his testimony: Cruz's questions concerned Andrew McCabe, while the indictment treated the exchange as concerning Daniel Richman.

Read the full chapter — all the detail, fully footnoted →

Sources

[1]Motion to Dismiss for Vindictive and Selective Prosecution, United States v. Comey, No. 1:25-cr-00272 (E.D. Va. ECF No. 59)

[2]Katherine Faulders, Alexander Mallin and Peter Charalambous, ABC News, 'Prosecutors' memo to new US attorney found no probable cause to charge James Comey: Sources' (Sept. 25, 2025)

[3]Opinion & Order granting the motion to dismiss, United States v. Comey, No. 1:25-cr-00272 (E.D. Va. ECF No. 213, Nov. 24, 2025) (Currie, Sr. U.S.D.J., sitting by designation)

[4]Opening Brief for the United States, United States v. James and United States v. Comey, Nos. 25-4673 and 25-4674 (4th Cir. Feb. 9, 2026)

[5]Indictment, United States v. Comey, No. 1:25-cr-00272 (E.D. Va. ECF No. 1, Sept. 25, 2025)

[7]Andrew Goudsward, Reuters, 'Judges question DOJ bid to revive cases against Trump foes Comey, James' (Sept. 15, 2026), reproduced by Internazionale

[9]18 U.S.C. § 1001, United States Code, 2023 edition (Government Publishing Office)

[10]18 U.S.C. § 1505, United States Code, 2023 edition (Government Publishing Office)

[11]Memorandum Opinion, United States v. Comey, No. 1:25-cr-00272, ECF 191 (E.D. Va. Nov. 17, 2025) (Fitzpatrick, M.J.)

2.2 · An Indictment Brought Without Lawful Authority

The Court Set the Indictment Aside

On November 24, 2025, Judge Currie held that Bondi's appointment of Halligan violated federal law and the Constitution's Appointments Clause. She set aside Halligan's acts, including securing and signing Comey's indictment, and rejected Bondi's attempts to approve them afterward. The dismissal was without prejudice: it did not itself bar a new prosecution.

Opinion & Order dismissing the indictment

I conclude that all actions flowing from Ms. Halligan’s defective appointment, including securing and signing Mr. Comey’s indictment, constitute unlawful exercises of executive power and must be set aside.

Judge Cameron McGowan Currie, U.S. District Court (sitting by designation) · November 24, 2025

Read the full chapter — all the detail, fully footnoted →

Sources

[1]Motion to Dismiss for Vindictive and Selective Prosecution, United States v. Comey, No. 1:25-cr-00272 (E.D. Va. ECF No. 59)

[3]Opinion & Order granting the motion to dismiss, United States v. Comey, No. 1:25-cr-00272 (E.D. Va. ECF No. 213, Nov. 24, 2025) (Currie, Sr. U.S.D.J., sitting by designation)

[4]Opening Brief for the United States, United States v. James and United States v. Comey, Nos. 25-4673 and 25-4674 (4th Cir. Feb. 9, 2026)

2.3 · An Indictment Brought Without Lawful Authority

The Indictment Failed, and DOJ Sought to Restore It

Trump praised the FBI after Comey's indictment and described Comey as being held responsible for crimes. But the indictment he celebrated ended in dismissal before trial. DOJ appealed to restore it.

Read the full chapter — all the detail, fully footnoted →

Sources

[1]Motion to Dismiss for Vindictive and Selective Prosecution, United States v. Comey, No. 1:25-cr-00272 (E.D. Va. ECF No. 59)

[3]Opinion & Order granting the motion to dismiss, United States v. Comey, No. 1:25-cr-00272 (E.D. Va. ECF No. 213, Nov. 24, 2025) (Currie, Sr. U.S.D.J., sitting by designation)

[4]Opening Brief for the United States, United States v. James and United States v. Comey, Nos. 25-4673 and 25-4674 (4th Cir. Feb. 9, 2026)

[5]Indictment, United States v. Comey, No. 1:25-cr-00272 (E.D. Va. ECF No. 1, Sept. 25, 2025)

[6]Motion to Dismiss for Unlawful Appointment (Appointments Clause / 28 U.S.C. § 546), United States v. Comey, No. 1:25-cr-00272 (E.D. Va. ECF No. 60)

[7]Andrew Goudsward, Reuters, 'Judges question DOJ bid to revive cases against Trump foes Comey, James' (Sept. 15, 2026), reproduced by Internazionale

3 · The Defense and the Abuse of Public Trust

3 · The Defense and the Abuse of Public Trust — select a subtopic

3.1 — The Strongest Defense Has Real Legal Force

3.2 — Why This Is a Case for Impeachment

3 · The Defense and the Abuse of Public Trust

3.1 · The Defense and the Abuse of Public Trust

The Strongest Defense Has Real Legal Force

The Supreme Court gives presidents strong protection against criminal prosecution for their dealings with DOJ, and recognizes their removal power. Prosecutors also receive broad discretion and strong protection against selective- or vindictive-prosecution claims. Those protections do not settle whether Trump's conduct abuses the public trust, the question impeachment addresses.

Read the full chapter — all the detail, fully footnoted →

Sources

[1]Motion to Dismiss for Vindictive and Selective Prosecution, United States v. Comey, No. 1:25-cr-00272 (E.D. Va. ECF No. 59)

[12]Trump v. United States, 603 U.S. ___ (2024) (slip opinion)

[13]Myers v. United States, 272 U.S. 52 (1926)

[14]United States v. Armstrong, 517 U.S. 456 (1996)

[15]United States v. Goodwin, 457 U.S. 368 (1982)

[16]U.S. Constitution, art. II, § 4 (National Archives transcript)

[17]Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist No. 65 (1788)

3.2 · The Defense and the Abuse of Public Trust

Why This Is a Case for Impeachment

The Constitution permits removal for high Crimes and Misdemeanors; Hamilton explained impeachment as a response to abuse of public trust. The case against Trump rests on his demand, his claim to have fired the prosecutor who said there was no case, the appointment of Halligan, whom he selected and later formally nominated, and his celebration of the resulting indictment. Retaliation is the charge drawn from that sequence; the unlawful appointment is what Judge Currie held.

Read the full chapter — all the detail, fully footnoted →

Sources

[1]Motion to Dismiss for Vindictive and Selective Prosecution, United States v. Comey, No. 1:25-cr-00272 (E.D. Va. ECF No. 59)

[2]Katherine Faulders, Alexander Mallin and Peter Charalambous, ABC News, 'Prosecutors' memo to new US attorney found no probable cause to charge James Comey: Sources' (Sept. 25, 2025)

[3]Opinion & Order granting the motion to dismiss, United States v. Comey, No. 1:25-cr-00272 (E.D. Va. ECF No. 213, Nov. 24, 2025) (Currie, Sr. U.S.D.J., sitting by designation)

[4]Opening Brief for the United States, United States v. James and United States v. Comey, Nos. 25-4673 and 25-4674 (4th Cir. Feb. 9, 2026)

[5]Indictment, United States v. Comey, No. 1:25-cr-00272 (E.D. Va. ECF No. 1, Sept. 25, 2025)

[16]U.S. Constitution, art. II, § 4 (National Archives transcript)

[17]Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist No. 65 (1788)

[18]Articles of Impeachment against Richard M. Nixon, Article 2 (Abuse of Power), adopted by the House Judiciary Committee (as reproduced on a page dated July 27, 1974) — American Presidency Project

[19]U.S. Senate Historical Office, 'Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities'

[20]Articles of Impeachment exhibited by the House of Representatives against Andrew Johnson (1868) — American Presidency Project