>> Continued From the Previous Page <<
Richman filed suit last month to prevent prosecutors from using materials he said were unlawfully seized during an investigation conducted between 2019 and 2020. Judge Kollar-Kotelly sided with Richman on key points, ruling that the government could not indefinitely retain copies of his files without proper legal protections.
In her Friday night decision, the judge said it was unreasonable for prosecutors to keep Richman’s records without safeguards that would prevent future searches unless a valid warrant was obtained. At the same time, she stopped short of blocking the government entirely.
Importantly, the ruling does not prevent the Justice Department from pursuing investigative leads derived from its earlier review of the materials. Prosecutors may also seek a new warrant to lawfully obtain the documents again, preserving a potential pathway forward.
The seized files had already played a role earlier this year when prosecutors used them in their now-dismissed case against Comey. The former FBI director was indicted in October on charges of making false statements and obstructing Congress, allegations tied to his 2020 testimony regarding anonymous FBI leaks to the media.
That case unraveled last month when a federal judge dismissed the indictments against both Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James. The court determined the indictments were obtained by an unlawfully appointed U.S. attorney in the Eastern District of Virginia, rendering the prosecutions invalid.
Since that ruling, two separate grand juries have reportedly refused to re-indict James—an extraordinary development that has raised serious questions about the strength and credibility of the government’s case.
Despite the dismissals, FBI Director Kash Patel has made it clear he does not view the prosecution of Comey as finished. Speaking two weeks ago, Patel signaled that additional action could be coming.
In an interview with The Epoch Times, Patel told senior editor Jan Jekielek that the Trump administration still has “numerous options to proceed” against the former FBI chief.
“The judicial process can make whatever determination it wants, but we at the FBI and our partners at the DOJ have numerous options to proceed, and we’re executing on all those options,” Patel said.
When pressed for specifics, Patel added, “I would say stay tuned for right after Thanksgiving and you’ll see multiple responses, in my opinion.”
Patel also hinted at explosive revelations tied to the now-infamous FBI “burn bags,” which have been at the center of growing scrutiny.
“You’re going to see everything we found in that room, in one way or another, be it through investigation, public trial, or disclosure to the Congress,” Patel said.
He went even further, characterizing the alleged misconduct in stark terms.
“It is the single largest weaponization, politicization of law enforcement against America, and specifically targeting a political party, because the institutional elite in Washington, D.C., didn’t like them and didn’t want them to win,” he added.
Separately, last month U.S. District Judge Cameron McGowan Currie ruled that Lindsey Halligan had been improperly appointed as interim U.S. attorney just days before filing the Comey case. That defect, the judge said, invalidated her actions—including signing Comey’s 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,” Currie wrote.
Although Currie dismissed the cases against Comey and James without prejudice—meaning prosecutors could refile—the string of judicial rebukes underscores the legal and political turmoil surrounding one of Washington’s most contentious prosecutions.
For now, the evidence must be returned, the indictments are void, and the future of the case remains uncertain. But with senior officials signaling more moves ahead, this fight is far from finished.
Is the same judge overseeing both cases, Comey and James? Were they both being tried in the same indictment? I don’t get it… anyway…
Maybe I’m wrong, but you would think these cases, separately, are each one of the most important deceptions perpetrated against, not just a current And former President, but against We The People!! How is it possible that there would be the smallest detail overlooked!? The DOJ should have both of these cases locked up tighter than a drum! Is it sabotage? Or are there incompetent people running the prosecutor’s office? Shouldn’t We Have The Best of the Best On These Cases!? DOJ… if you screw the pig on these prosecutions I will Never have faith in our justice system again!! DO YOUR JOB!! LOCK UP THESE CRIMINALS!!