Trump DOJ Gets FULLY EXPOSED in COURT as Indictment COLLAPSES

We got some breaking news and a development in the former FBI director James Comey's criminal case. That indictment is about to blow up in the face of the Department of Justice based on two major events that happened just today in Judge Nack Manoff's courtroom. It was supposed to be a hearing about whether the indictment against Comey should be dismissed for malicious and vindictive prosecution, but it became much more than that.

Two major bombshell developments. One, the judge, after doing some tough questioning of the DOJ US attorney, Tyler Lemons, Mr. Lemons, after a much hemming and hawing, had to admit that he reviewed a memo that said that Comey should not be indicted,

written by career prosecutors in that office before Lindsey Halligan indicted him, and that he was instructed by Washington, by the number two in the Department of Justice, Todd Blanch, not to reveal that to the judge. That's a bad place to be for Mr. Lemons.

You can't make, get ready for it, folks, you can't make lemonade out of those lemons. And then Lindsey Halligan finally spoke up in court, but it didn't help her. She was cross-examined by the judge about how did the second indictment come to being? What was the origin story around the second indictment? Why were there two indictments?

And after she got done describing how the second indictment came into being, a cut and paste job in which the entire grand jury was not privy to the document. So how did they return a true bill if the true bill was never presented to the grand jury? She presented indictment number one, but in night indictment number one failed because they didn't indict on the first count. So

when the judge inquired, well, how did you do indictment number two, she said she effectively put another copy in front of just two of the 14 grand jurors that voted to indict and had them sign it. She cut and pasted and fabricated a new indictment. That led to the lawyers for James Comey to stand up,

including Mr. Dreeben, and say, we have no indictment, Your Honor. We don't have a properly returned true bill of indictment. It should be dismissed on its face. And if it gets dismissed, no, they're not going to be able to go

back and impanel a new grand jury and fix their problems because the statute of limitations on the purported perjury have run. That case needed to be brought by indictment by September the 5th of 2025. Check your watch. We're in November, our calendar.

We're in November. And this is a tremendous set of developments. This is what happens when you create an Insta prosecutor who's never been a prosecutor before and ask you to go indict a former FBI director. I'm Michael Popok.

You're on Legal AF on Wednesday, and we're covering this fast moving story both here and on Legal AF Substack. All right, let's unpack it all. Former FBI director James Comey was indicted or not on two purported counts of perjury

and interfering with an investigation of Congress related to his testimony on September the 5th of 2020. That indictment needed to be obtained by a grand jury within five years. Donald Trump fired the US attorney Eric Siebert for the Eastern District of Virginia when he refused to bring a case against both James Comey and Letitia James. They then appointed Lindsey Halligan. Now there was a lot of discussion today in the room

about a September social media post by Donald Trump, which was supposed to be a direct message to Pam Bondi, directing Pam Bondi to immediately bring indictments against people like Letitia James and James Comey by name and to use Lindsey Halligan to do it. That left a very uncomfortable, let's just put it this way, Tyler Lemons for the US, for the Department of Justice standing in, I think he practices in North Carolina, they schlepped him up for Virginia to say to the judge looking down at his shoelaces

that, well, there's no evidence, your honor, that the indictment was brought because Donald Trump commanded it or that there's a lack of independence of Lindsey Halligan. Are you kidding me? He had no evidence to support that. He just said it, naked argument of Tyler Lemons while Lindsey Halligan was sitting there. Of course, he had to admit under cross-examination or as the argument was made by the lawyers for James Comey that the Trump administration and Department of Justice admitted to the Wall Street Journal that

that was supposed to be a direct message to Lindsey Halligan. It wasn't supposed to be posted on Truth Social. And then within 48 hours, Eric Siebert was out, Lindsey Halligan was in, and James Comey was indictment. That is an, I mean, if that's not a circumstantial evidence at least of vindictive prosecution, I don't know what is. But that's not even the headline for this hearing. The headline for this hearing is that Tyler Lemons for the Department of Justice admitted that he was told to withhold documents and information from a federal judge by the number two in the Department of Justice admitted that he was told to withhold documents and information

from a federal judge by the number two in the Department of Justice. I've said it before, I'll say it again, this is the most corrupt Department of Justice in history. And what was the information that was being withheld from the judge until the judge cross-examined Tyler Lemons and took over the hearing for himself? It was whether there was, as the defense has said, a memo, as has been reported in the press, a memo from career prosecutors in the Eastern District recommending against the prosecution of James Comey and against Letitia James for that matter.

And so when the judge inquired to Mr. Lemons, does such a document exist? Because if it does, it needs to be turned over to the defense as part of, we're going to trial in less than two months. And he said, well, I'm not aware if it does or it doesn't, but it would be privileged, your honor. And then when pressed harder, he had to admit that he had seen a draft of that particular memo. So the thing that doesn't exist, he's read a draft of and that he was told by the Department of Justice not to release that document, not to inform anybody about the existence of that document.

Too late, Mr. Lemons. We all know about it now. I'm doing a hot take about it right now. And that is Brady material that needs to get turned over to the defense to allow them to put that on in front of a jury. If that's not reasonable doubt for a jury to hear at trial,

I don't know what is. Career prosecutors in the office said there's no case. That's immediate, that's immediate reasonable doubt. But I don't even think we get that far everybody because of the other admissions in the courtroom. So the judge took the time since Lindsay Halligan was there.

She's never as of now said anything substantively in a courtroom, but now she had to answer questions as an officer of the court to the judge who took over the questioning. And he said, let's get to the bottom of the second indictment, the mystery of the second indictment. Now, what's that all about? We reported at the time that there were not one but two signed indictments by Lindsay Halligan. Already that's wrong. There shouldn't be two signed indictments by the prosecutor. And when the magistrate judge at the time inquired to

Lindsey Halligan, why are there two signed? Lindsey Halligan lied to that judge and said there aren't. And the judge held up two pieces of paper and said, there are two with your signature on it. So she was already confused. Turns out that when the grand jury did not agree on all three counts of the indictment and only agreed to a indict on counts two and three, rather than bring in a brand new indictment

into the grand jury room and have them review and sign it, or the jury foreperson to do that, instead, Lindsey Halligan never met with the grand jury again, a fact she admitted in an affidavit she filed last week with Judge Curry, a judge who's looking at whether she should be dismissed for having been illegally

appointed, but pointed out by the judges in the Eastern District of Virginia. And they said, why is there a two hour gap in the grand jury transcript? And why is there no information or transcript about the second indictment? And Lindsay Halligan had to admit, because I didn't go back to the grand jury for the second indictment. And Judge Nackmanoff today in the hearing said, well, how'd you get the second indictment? And she said she brought out a four person and another grand juror. There were 14 people that signed this, by the way, to get the indictment. She brought out two out of 14.

They reviewed it and they signed it. And that's why Mr. Dreevens, on behalf of the Comey side, jumped up and said, there's no indictment. We have no indictment, your honor. That is a illegal true bill. No true bill has been returned because the 14 people that said that there was a true

bill never got to see the final document. How do you can't have the grand jury vote on an indictment that's not in front of them. You can't have them vote on one indictment and then make a change into another piece of paper and say, see, they agreed. How could they agree to something they've never seen? And if that indictment fails, this isn't the case where they get to go back and do it again. You don't get a mulligan, you don't get a do-over. You would normally, except the statute of limitations has run.

Now, the statute of limitations for perjury to Congress is five years. That's why they were in such a rush to get Lindsay Halligan appointed as a federal prosecutor for the first time in her life, I don't think she's ever been in a federal courtroom and sent her in to get the indictment. Okay, time's up now. And they're going to try to argue some sort of relationship back. There's no relationship back. You can't say, well, we tried and failed, so the clock stopped then and we get to try again. That's not how it works in an indictment world on a statute of limitations. And I don't think equity, meaning a judge, is going to be able to

roll back the clock and fix it for them because I don't think that's allowed under the Constitution. So that was a bad day in court for Lindsay Halligan. The first time she's heard from, but she had to be a witness, not an advocate, in order to respond to the judge. And a tap-dancing Mr. Tyler Lemons, who couldn't answer the judge's questions either except a couple of times he did he wrapped himself around his own axle and had to admit he was being instructed by the Department of Justice to effectively mislead the judge. Oh what a tangled web. So now the judge has announced that he's got a lot to sort through

and he's ordered that by five o'clock today in a couple hours, they are gonna have to file the Department of Justice an explanation as to why the jury didn't see the second indictment and whether the second indictment is valid or not. Let me short circuit this, it isn't. But the judge says he's gonna take some time.

Maybe we'll get a ruling before Thanksgiving. As soon as that five o'clock filing hits the docket, I will come back to you here on Legal AF and on and on the sub stack and report on that as well. Until then, I'm Michael Popock. Take a minute, hit the free subscribe button, help us continue to grow this channel to 1 million

subscribers. With your help, we will. 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 on what we started together on Legal AF, I've launched a new law firm, the Popock 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 or a loved one have been 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. The Popak Firm. Fighting for your justice every step of the way.