Lindsey Halligan says full grand jury never saw final indictment it handed up against Comey

[LetMyPeopleVote]

This is a fraud on the court. This indictment will be dismissed and Halligan should be sanctioned/disbarred

University of Miami School of Law: Lindsey Halligan says Full Grand Jury Never saw Final Indictment It Handed Up against Comey www.cnn.com/politics/liv...

— ljconrad (@ljconrad.bsky.social) 2025-11-19T17:04:31.920Z

https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/james-comey-doj-case-hearing-11-19-25

The full grand jury never reviewed the indictment it handed up against former FBI Director James Comey, interim US Attorney Lindsey Halligan conceded Wednesday.

In a shocking back and forth, prosecutors said that instead of presenting a new indictment to the grand jury after it declined to approve one of the counts, Halligan simply brought an altered version to the magistrate’s courtroom for the grand jury’s foreperson to sign.

“The new indictment wasn’t a new indictment,” prosecutor Tyler Lemons said, attempting to justify that it was only reviewed by the foreperson.

Judge Michael Nachmanoff quickly called Halligan, who was the only prosecutor who presented the case to the grand jury, to the lectern, asking her to confirm that the entire grand jury was never presented the altered indictment.....

Comey’s attorney Michael Dreeben then argued to the judge that, given the testimony of the prosecutor, “no indictment was returned.”

“There is no indictment,” he said, adding that the statute of limitations has now elapsed against Comey on charges of lying to Congress.

[Prairie Gates]

1. The defense is dunking on them: "There is no indictment."

Brutal stuff.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

2. It is clear that Halligan is not a criminal lawyer

Hard to imagine putting someone who isn't a litigator at all, let alone a criminal lawyer, in charge of Trump's most important (and blatantly political) prosecutions turned out not to have been a smart move.

— Chris Geidner (@chrisgeidner.bsky.social) 2025-11-19T17:26:34.118Z

[NotHardly]

18. Actually, she is a "criminal" lawyer, if you get my drift.

[RockRaven]

3. When is one of these judges going to start lecturing the AUSAs about their duties

and liabilities as officers of the court? These assholes carrying water for The Dotard and his clown USAs need a professional comeuppance.

[Historic NY]

4. Well they are the

]

[DemocratSinceBirth]

5. Any lawyer will agree with me.

All lawyers have to know the law to pass the Bar, but you don't expect an insurance lawyer to adroitly prosecute or defend a criminal case. That's why there are specialties. My friend is a med mal lawyer who is good enough to be a member of the Inner Circle of Advocates. When I had a question about a contract she immediately referred me to a specialist in that area.

[Ocelot II]

7. Yup. You don't want the best obstetrician in town to do your open-heart surgery.

And that doctor would refuse to do it anyhow. An ethical lawyer with no background in criminal prosecution and who had only ever practiced insurance law wouldn't have accepted the appointment as US Attorney in the first place, but we're talking about a Trump appointee here, so...

[DemocratSinceBirth]

21. On the refrigerator in her office she had a sheet of paper with lawyers in different specialities.

Comey is way beyond his case being prejudiced, especially with the grand jury shenanigans. I don't see how any judge doesn't dismiss the case. They'll cry because it's a Biden judge, MAGA has brought us to the point where we can't trust a judge regardless of his or her partisanship to fairly administer the law but here we are, and the judge's ruling can be appealed.

[ProfessorGAC]

8. Good Post

There are specialists in most professional fields.
There are lots of PhD chemists, and I was a spevialist in one area, but there are other areas of chemistry of which I was merely aware. Far from a specialist's knowledge.
Same thing with Halligan. And, I'm not convinced she was all that good an insurance lawyer.

[Jersey Devil]

15. Actually, with Grand Juries it may be the opposite

When you graduate from law school it is without any specialty (unless you stay in school as a postgraduate for an LLM). Very often new lawyers seek out jobs to get trial experience such as a prosecutor or public defender. When new prosecutors come on board they are usually given menial job such as trying petty crimes or even traffic offenses or grand jury assignments, things that won't matter much if they screw up. If you don't get an indictment because you screwed up you can simply try again since double jeopardy does not apply to grand jury proceedings.

[Ms. Toad]

30. Not once the statue of limitations has expired. n/t

[LetMyPeopleVote]

16. I am a corporate attorney and while I have worked on litigation matters, I would not think about doing a grand jury

I have worked on a couple of fun lawsuits and even argued a summary judgement motion (this was on Delaware corporate law on the concept of ultra vires) but I would stay away from criminal law.

[yardwork]

22. I think you all are giving her way too much credit!

Her incompetence and negligence are the features that attracted Trump to her. Unbothered by ethics or even a working knowledge of criminal law, she does exactly what Trump tells her to do.

These prosecutions weren't intended to be successful except perhaps in the addled narcissistic Trump brain. They're political theatre enacted by Trump toadies whose goal is to be looked upon favorably by the criminal in the White House who is in a position to hand out either punishments or rewards.

[democratsruletheday]

24. correct 'yardwork'...and they are also intended to

stress out, harass and bankrupt Comey/Bolton/James, etc....NO real intent of winning in court. Just trolling which is about all these shitters are good at doing. Can't govern or walk, talk, and chew bubble gum. Sure as fuck can't multi task.

[Pacifist Patriot]

25. I have had a divorce lawyer and tax attorney meddle in employment law.

They made a mess of it. The legal profession is so complex it requires specialization for a reason!

[Ocelot II]

6. It looks like Lindsey Hooligan might have lied in the first place

about the way she presented the indictment.

What happened is that the prosecutor had presented the grand jury with two inconsistent indictments, the first with three counts and the second removing the first count. Both indictments were fully executed by grand jury foreperson and the prosecutor. After questioning the GJ foreperson the magistrate judge accepted the return of the second signed indictment, which was a new indictment that would have been presented to the GJ before being returned in open court. It now appears that may not have happened. The prosecutor stated that after the grand jury was left to deliberate on the first indictment at approximately 4:28 p.m., she had no further contact with the grand jury, and that about two hours later the acting assistant USA notified her that the grand jury returned a true bill on only two of the three counts of the first indictment. The prosecutor then went to the courtroom for the return of the indictment. The hearing on the return of the indictment began only about 7 minutes later. From the court's memorandum:

The short time span between the moment the prosecutor learned that the grand jury rejected one count in the original indictment and the time the prosecutor appeared in court to return the second indictment could not have been sufficient to draft the second indictment, sign the second indictment, present it to the grand jury, provide legal instructions to the grand jury, and give them an opportunity to deliberate and render a decision on the new indictment. If the prosecutor is mistaken about the time she received notification of the grand jury’s vote on the original indictment, and this procedure did take place, then the transcript and audio recording provided to the Court are incomplete. If this procedure did not take place, then the Court is in uncharted legal territory in that the indictment returned in open court was not the same charging document presented to and deliberated upon by the grand jury.

If the Court is to read the prosecutor’s declaration as suggesting there was no contact between any government official and the grand jury after 4:28 p.m., then it begs the question of how the then-First Assistant learned that the grand jury had refused to indict on one count, and how the First Assistant knew which count had been rejected by the grand jury, all before the indictment was returned in open court.

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.vaed.582135/gov.uscourts.vaed.582135.191.0.pdf

Maybe incompetent Insurance Lawyer Barbie didn't want to present an indictment that included a count as to which the GJ found no probable cause - she wanted to be able to say they'd indicted Comey on all counts. But, as the judge suspected, she never actually presented the second, two-count indictment at all. Either she was trying to pull a fast one, or else she just has no idea how to do any of this. In either event, her incompetence and/or duplicity has probably torpedoed the last shreds of what was a phony prosecution in the first place.

[kentuck]

9. That sounds illegal?

Is it a mistrial?

[rzemanfl]

12. No trial to miss. It should be a dismissal.

The indictment is defective, and the Statute of Limitations has run, perhaps twice.

[Baitball Blogger]

10. .

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/LGF69mj4sRE

[LetMyPeopleVote]

11. 'Unreal incompetence': Lindsey Halligan makes stunning 'admission' about James Comey case

Halligan needs to be sanctioned and this indictment dismissed

'Unreal incompetence': Lindsey Halligan makes stunning 'admission' about James Comey case

— #TuckFrump (@realtuckfrumper.bsky.social) 2025-11-19T17:23:53.000Z

https://www.rawstory.com/lindsay-halligan-grand-jury-comey/

President Donald Trump's hand-picked interim U.S. attorney delivered bombshell testimony that may have destroyed her case against former FBI Director James Comey.

Lindsay Halligan, who was tapped as interim U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, admitted during brief testimony Wednesday that the indictment in the case against the Trump foe was never shown to or voted on by a full grand jury before it was presented in open court, reported CNN.

"HUGE development IN hearing for Comey selective prosecution motion," posted former federal prosecutor Harry Litman. "It turns out that the grand jury NEVER saw the operative indictment. Whole separate basis for dismissal."

Comey's defense team argued that development should prevent further prosecution in the case, saying "there is no indictment," and Judge Michael Nachmanoff gave the Department of Justice until 5 p.m. to respond to the revelations.

"This is almost unreal incompetence," posted Chris Geidner, author of the "Lawdork" blog.

Defense attorney Michael Dreeben argued in the hearing the case was brought at Trump's direction and based on his animosity to the former FBI director, and federal prosecutor Tyler Lemons responded by arguing that Halligan was “not a puppet."

[UTUSN]

13. KKK&&&RRR!!!

[Mr.WeRP]

14. The Judge should file a disbarment request for every prosecutor involved

[LetMyPeopleVote]

17. The judge has ordered briefing on this

Link to tweet

[leftyladyfrommo]

19. George Conway said that a month ago. They never had a case. nt

[Half-step]

20. Clowns

Clowns one and all, up and down the chain.

[PatrickforB]

23. This seems to be a rectal-cranial prosecution strategy...n/t

[Irish_Dem]

26. I never knew that if you don't like a court document you can just alter it to your liking.

Present it to the judge who is none the wiser.

Maybe wear a low cut dress with a short skirt and wink at the judge a bit.

Maybe being a lawyer isn't so boring after all.

[PJMcK]

27. The way you describe it...

... being the judge ain't too bad, either!

[Irish_Dem]

28. I wonder if he will ask her to step into his chambers.

[Trumpdumper]

29. The judge ordered DOJ to file an explanation of the grand jury screw-up by 5 p.m. EST today

Has anyone seen it?

[LetMyPeopleVote]

31. Ty Cobb-Attorney General Pam Bondi and interim U.S. Attorney Lindsey Halligan should be disbarred

Link to tweet