Trump's Hapless DOJ Lawyers ALREADY LOSE First Court Battle In Comey Case - Glenn Kirschner

[Rhiannon12866]

Trump's unqualified US Attorney, Lindsey Halligan, and the two prosecutors she brought in from the North Carolina US Attorney's Office are showcasing their incompetence in the way they are handling the prosecution of former FBI Director James Comey.

Not only did the presiding judge just rule against the prosecution in the first contested issue in the case, but the DOJ prosecutors may have given Comey and his defense team even more ammunition for their motion to dismiss based on vindictive and selective prosecution.

This video discusses the new ruling from Judge Nachmanoff, and why the footnote the judge dropped in his order exposes the selective nature of the Comey prosecution. - Glenn Kirschner - 10/15/2025.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

1. Deadline Legal Blog-Comey wins early discovery fight as judge finds Trump DOJ stance would cause needless delay

Accepting Lindsey Halligan's proposal, the judge wrote, “would unnecessarily hinder and delay Defendant’s ability to adequately prepare for trial.”

The judge wrote that the Trump DOJ’s proposal “would unnecessarily hinder and delay Defendant’s ability to adequately prepare for trial.”

Comey wins early discovery fight as judge finds Trump DOJ stance would cause needless delay

www.yahoo.com/news/article...

— Lauren Ashley Davis (@laurenmeidasa.bsky.social) 2025-10-14T16:43:01.679Z

https://www.msnbc.com/deadline-white-house/deadline-legal-blog/comey-indictment-trump-doj-discovery-ruling-rcna237506

It’s early yet in the James Comey case, but the former FBI director got a quick win on a procedural issue that reinforces the presiding judge’s refusal to allow needless delay in the criminal case against the Donald Trump critic brought by a Trump-installed prosecutor.

That reinforcement came from U.S. District Judge Michael Nachmanoff, who rejected the Justice Department’s motion for a protective order that would’ve limited Comey’s access to discovery. The judge wrote that the Trump DOJ’s proposal “would unnecessarily hinder and delay Defendant’s ability to adequately prepare for trial.”

In a two-page order explaining his decision Monday, Nachmanoff, a Biden appointee sitting in the Eastern District of Virginia, noted that prior high-profile false statement cases didn’t have the sort of limitations the government proposed here. The judge added that the DOJ proposal didn’t sufficiently detail the information purportedly needing protection, thus making the request overbroad.

Though the decision on this one discrete issue doesn’t dictate how the case will end (heftier pretrial motions to dismiss are due later this month), its on-task tone is in keeping with the one Nachmanoff set at Comey’s arraignment last week, where the former lawman pleaded not guilty to the two-count indictment secured by former Trump personal lawyer Lindsey Halligan, over the objection of career prosecutors: one count for allegedly lying to Congress and another for allegedly obstructing Congress. At the arraignment, Nachmanoff approved a swift litigation schedule featuring a Jan. 5 trial date, which the judge said he had been prepared to set even sooner had the defense requested a December start date.

So whatever Halligan’s plan for the case is — to the extent she has one, not having prosecuted a case before — delay shouldn’t be a part of it. Just before Comey’s arraignment, she brought in two DOJ lawyers from North Carolina who have prosecuted cases before. She similarly secured an indictment last week against New York Attorney General Letitia James, whose prosecution Trump also called for like he did Comey’s. James is due to appear in court Oct. 24.

[Rhiannon12866]

2. Thanks so much!