Listen to the article
Former FBI Director James Comey Indicted on Perjury Charges Amid Political Controversy
Former FBI Director James Comey faces two criminal counts after a federal grand jury in Virginia indicted him on September 25 for allegedly lying to Congress. The remarkably brief indictment provides scant details about the evidence supporting these serious charges.
The timing of the indictment has raised significant concerns about political interference. It came just days after President Donald Trump publicly demanded the Department of Justice prosecute Comey and appointed Lindsey Halligan, his former personal attorney, as interim U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia. Halligan replaced Erik Siebert, who was reportedly removed from the position.
According to anonymous sources cited by ABC News, Siebert and other career prosecutors who led the Comey investigation had previously determined there was insufficient evidence to bring charges. Halligan, who has no prior prosecutorial experience, presented the case to the grand jury that ultimately returned the indictment.
The charges specifically relate to testimony Comey gave before the Senate Judiciary Committee on September 30, 2020. The indictment claims Comey “willfully and knowingly” made a “materially false, fictitious, and fraudulent statement” when he denied authorizing someone at the FBI to be an anonymous source for news reports regarding an investigation concerning an unidentified “PERSON 1.”
While the indictment does not name the individuals involved, the exchange appears to reference questioning by Republican Senator Ted Cruz about Comey’s previous May 2017 testimony. Cruz had asked whether Comey had ever authorized FBI personnel to be anonymous sources regarding investigations into Trump or Clinton.
Several news outlets have reported that “PERSON 1” is likely Hillary Clinton, and “PERSON 3” is believed to be Daniel Richman, a Columbia Law School professor and former federal prosecutor who worked as a “special government employee” at the FBI during Comey’s tenure.
The indictment may relate to the FBI’s “Arctic Haze” investigation into leaked classified information that appeared in major newspapers in early 2017. These articles included details about the Russia investigation and the probe into Clinton’s emails. An FBI memo released in August indicated that Comey often used Richman “as a liaison to the media,” though that same investigation concluded there was “insufficient evidence to criminally charge any person, including Comey or Richman.”
Notably, this differs from Comey’s acknowledged use of Richman to share information with the New York Times after both men had left the FBI. In June 2017, Comey testified that he had Richman relay the contents of a memo documenting a conversation with Trump about Michael Flynn, hoping it would prompt the appointment of a special counsel.
Former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, whose actions Cruz incorrectly characterized in the 2020 hearing, stated on CNN that he “absolutely” does not believe the indictment relates to his interactions with Comey about a 2016 Wall Street Journal article. McCabe noted that prosecutors have not interviewed him as part of their investigation, which he called “unbelievable” if his interactions with Comey were central to the case.
Legal experts have questioned whether the indictment might be dismissed due to potential political motivation. The charges came just days before the statute of limitations would have expired on Comey’s 2020 testimony. Additionally, on the same day Trump appointed Halligan, he publicly demanded that the Justice Department prosecute Comey and other perceived political adversaries.
Comey, who served as FBI director from 2013 until Trump fired him in 2017, responded to the indictment in a video statement, saying: “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.”
More details about the evidence against Comey may remain unknown until the case proceeds to trial—if it does. The unusual brevity of the indictment, its timing, and the circumstances surrounding its filing continue to fuel debate about whether these charges represent legitimate prosecution or politically motivated retribution.
Verify This Yourself
Use these professional tools to fact-check and investigate claims independently
Reverse Image Search
Check if this image has been used elsewhere or in different contexts
Ask Our AI About This Claim
Get instant answers with web-powered AI analysis
Related Fact-Checks
See what other fact-checkers have said about similar claims
Want More Verification Tools?
Access our full suite of professional disinformation monitoring and investigation tools
10 Comments
As an investor in mining and energy stocks, I’m keeping a close watch on how this Comey situation unfolds. Instability in the political sphere can certainly impact the commodities markets.
The lack of transparent evidence in the Comey indictment is troubling. Given his high-profile role, I would expect a more robust case to be presented if the charges are warranted.
Absolutely. Without a clear and convincing case, this indictment risks being seen as politically motivated rather than a legitimate legal proceeding.
As an investor in mining and energy companies, I’m curious to see how this Comey case impacts the broader political landscape and any potential policy changes that could affect my portfolio.
Good point. Political instability and uncertainty can definitely create volatility in the commodities and energy markets. Keeping a close eye on developments will be crucial.
This Comey indictment certainly raises eyebrows. Without more transparency on the evidence, it’s hard to judge if the charges are justified or politically motivated. I’ll be watching closely to see how this case unfolds.
Agreed, the timing and circumstances around this indictment are very concerning. Hopefully, the truth will come to light through a fair and impartial process.
This Comey indictment is concerning, especially given the timing and lack of transparent evidence. I hope the justice system will handle this case fairly and objectively, without undue political interference.
Agreed. The integrity of our institutions is critical, especially when it comes to high-profile cases that could have wider implications.
The Comey indictment is a complex and troubling development. As an investor in mining and energy, I’m curious to see how it might impact policy and regulations in those sectors.