Unusual Steps in Comey's Indictment Raise Questions

A recent court hearing has brought to light some odd details about how former FBI Director James Comey ended up facing charges. It turns out that the full grand jury didn't actually see the final indictment against Comey. Only the foreperson and one other juror got to review it. This came up during a hearing where Comey's legal team is trying to get the charges thrown out, arguing that the whole thing is politically motivated. The judge seemed pretty puzzled by this revelation. They asked the Justice Department's lawyer if there was a memo from career prosecutors saying they shouldn't charge Comey. The lawyer dodged the question at first, then said he wasn't allowed to answer. This didn't sit well with the judge, who wanted to know why the lawyer couldn't just say if the memo existed or not. Comey's lawyers are making a big deal about how this whole prosecution seems like payback from President Trump. They point out that Trump has been very public about wanting Comey prosecuted, even pressuring officials to make it happen. The lawyers argue that without Trump's involvement, this case probably wouldn't exist. The charges against Comey are about allegedly lying to Congress. Prosecutors say he claimed he never authorized leaks to the press, but they have evidence that he directed an academic to share information with a New York Times reporter. Comey denies this, saying he never gave anyone permission to leak on his behalf. The judge has some serious concerns about how this case was handled. They mentioned a "disturbing pattern" of mistakes by the prosecutor who brought the charges. There are even questions about whether the grand jury saw the same indictment that's now in court. The judge ordered audio recordings of the grand jury proceedings to be handed over to Comey's defense team, though that decision is still being fought over. Prosecutors are pushing back, saying Comey can't prove this is just about punishing him for criticizing Trump. They argue that lying by someone in Comey's position is a big deal and can't be ignored. They also say that Trump's social media posts don't prove vindictive motives, just that he thinks Comey committed crimes. This whole situation has raised a lot of eyebrows, with the judge calling out some fundamental legal errors in how the case was presented. It's clear that this case is far from straightforward, and the unusual steps taken to bring it have only added to the controversy.