Judge Orders DOJ to Release Grand Jury Transcripts in Comey Case

URGENT UPDATE: In a significant turn of events, U.S. District Court Judge Cameron McGowan Currie has ordered the Department of Justice (DOJ) to provide unedited transcripts from the grand jury that indicted former FBI Director James Comey. This order comes after the DOJ failed to include critical statements from interim U.S. Attorney Lindsey Halligan, raising serious questions about the integrity of the indictment.

Earlier this month, Judge Currie demanded the complete transcripts, emphasizing their necessity to assess Halligan’s involvement in the grand jury proceedings. The judge’s order follows Comey’s contention that the indictment should be dismissed, citing Halligan’s appointment as invalid due to her ties with former President Donald Trump.

In a recent statement, Judge Currie revealed that while the DOJ submitted the transcripts, they were heavily redacted, omitting Halligan’s comments. “This court has reviewed the transcript and finds it fails to include remarks made by the indictment signer both before and after the testimony of the sole witness,” Currie stated. She has now given the DOJ a strict deadline of 24 hours to produce a complete transcript that includes all relevant statements made by Halligan.

Legal experts are expressing concern over this unusual demand from the court. Former U.S. Attorney Joyce Vance commented, “It is unusual for a court to ask for disclosure of a prosecutor’s comments in the grand jury. And never good news for the government.”

This latest development raises the stakes in a case already fraught with political implications. As the deadline approaches, the pressure mounts on the DOJ to comply with the court’s order. Failure to do so could result in further legal challenges and scrutiny of the indictment process.

The situation remains fluid, with potential ramifications not only for Comey but also for the broader integrity of the justice system. Observers will be watching closely as these events unfold, particularly regarding how the DOJ responds to the judge’s demands.

Stay tuned for more updates on this developing story, as the implications of these legal proceedings could resonate well beyond the courtroom.