Comey moves to dismiss charges, claims Trump’s prosecution is payback


This recording was made using enhanced software.

Summary

Retaliation allegations

Comey’s lawyers argue that the charges against him are retaliatory, claiming that the prosecution is a personal vendetta by the president in response to Comey’s public criticism.

Evidence of retaliation

Comey's legal team submitted a 60-page collection of public statements by both Trump and Comey as part of their motions.

Prosecutor appointment challenge

Comey's team argues that Lindsey Halligan, the interim U.S. Attorney who filed the charges, was "defectively appointed."


Full story

Former FBI Director James Comey filed two separate motions to dismiss the federal charges Trump’s Justice Department brought against him. The department indicted Comey on two charges: making a false statement and obstruction of a congressional proceeding.

He appeared in federal court in Maryland on Friday, where he pleaded not guilty to the charges. Now, his lawyers are trying to have the case thrown out.

QR code for SAN app download

Download the SAN app today to stay up-to-date with Unbiased. Straight Facts™.

Point phone camera here

Comey’s motions

One of the motions filed Monday argues that the case is simply retaliation — a personal vendetta by the president. The other claims that the Trump administration never legally appointed the prosecutors who filed it.

Comey’s team has described the indictment as “an egregious abuse of power.” They claim Trump targeted him because of his public criticism.

“The United States Constitution entitles individuals to speak out against the government and, in turn, forbids the government from retaliating against individuals for their protected speech,” his attorneys wrote. They added “but that is exactly what happened here.”

As part of the filings, Comey’s lawyers submitted a 60-page collection of public statements by Trump and Comey. It’s a paper trail that they said shows a clear retaliation pattern.

“In response to Mr. Comey’s protected speech, President Trump has resorted to personal attacks and calls for retaliation through punishment and imprisonment. The pattern of the president’s statements and actions demonstrates a clear intent to subject Comey to official reprisal for his protected speech.”

The former FBI director also argued that Lindsey Halligan — a former Trump lawyer named interim U.S. Attorney — was “defectively appointed,” making the entire indictment invalid. She took over after her predecessor, Erik Siebert, was forced out under pressure to indict New York Attorney General Letitia James.

Comey’s filings cite Trump’s own classified documents case in Florida, where a judge dismissed charges over a similar appointment issue.

Jason Morrell (Morning Managing Editor), Emma Stoltzfus (Video Editor), and Devan Markham (Morning Digital Producer) contributed to this report.
Tags: ,

SAN provides
Unbiased. Straight Facts.

Don’t just take our word for it.


Certified balanced reporting

According to media bias experts at AllSides

AllSides Certified Balanced May 2025

Transparent and credible

Awarded a perfect reliability rating from NewsGuard

100/100

Welcome back to trustworthy journalism.

Find out more

Why this story matters

This story highlights debates around prosecutorial independence, high-level government accountability and the processes behind political investigations, raising questions about the intersection of law, politics and constitutional rights in the U.S. justice system.

Prosecutorial independence

Multiple sources describe allegations by James Comey's legal team that his prosecution was motivated by the president's personal animus, citing public statements and the replacement of career prosecutors with political appointees.

Legal process and appointment

According to court filings reported by sources such as CNN and Reuters, Comey's attorneys argue that the appointment of U.S. Attorney Lindsey Halligan was unlawful and thus invalidates the indictment.

Political retaliation and free speech

Comey's defense, as reported by various news organizations, claims the case represents selective or vindictive prosecution in response to his public criticism of President Trump, raising broader questions about constitutional protections for political dissent.

Get the big picture

Synthesized coverage insights across 161 media outlets

History lesson

Legal motions to dismiss on grounds of vindictive or selective prosecution are seldom granted because they require substantial evidence of genuine animus and discrimination. Previous similar motions in federal cases have set a high bar for success.

Oppo research

Opponents of the prosecution argue that the charges are driven by political animus and represent a misuse of government power to punish critics, pointing to public statements and actions taken by President Trump and his administration.

Policy impact

The outcome of the case could shape future norms about the politicization of the Justice Department and the appointment process for U.S. Attorneys, potentially affecting legal protections for political critics.

SAN provides
Unbiased. Straight Facts.

Don’t just take our word for it.


Certified balanced reporting

According to media bias experts at AllSides

AllSides Certified Balanced May 2025

Transparent and credible

Awarded a perfect reliability rating from NewsGuard

100/100

Welcome back to trustworthy journalism.

Find out more

Bias comparison

  • Media outlets on the left frame Comey's case as an "egregious abuse of power" and "vindictive quest" "fueled by Trump 'spite'," often adopting his lawyers' language directly to portray the prosecution as illegitimate and highlighting "smoking gun evidence" of "flagrant misconduct.
  • Media outlets in the center distinctly attribute all strong claims, like "vindictive prosecution," to Comey's legal team, often using quotation marks, and uniquely mention the trial date.
  • Media outlets on the right while also citing "vindictive" and "unlawful" claims, often attributes these more explicitly as Comey's allegations, sometimes suggesting his personal perspective on "unlawful prosecution" or "political persecution.

Media landscape

Click on bars to see headlines

161 total sources

Key points from the Left

  • James Comey has asked a federal judge to dismiss criminal charges against him, claiming that the prosecution is a result of personal spite from President Donald Trump.
  • Comey's legal team argues that the appointment of U.S. Attorney Lindsey Halligan to prosecute him was unlawful and violates constitutional principles.
  • The charges against Comey stem from alleged false statements and obstruction during his 2020 congressional testimony related to the Trump-Russia investigation.
  • Comey has pleaded not guilty to the charges, and his case is set to be heard by U.S. District Judge Michael Nachmanoff in January 2026.

Report an issue with this summary

Key points from the Center

No summary available because of a lack of coverage.

Report an issue with this summary

Key points from the Right

  • Former FBI Director James Comey's lawyers filed a motion to dismiss his case, claiming it to be a "vindictive prosecution" due to President Donald Trump's personal animus and public statements against him.
  • Comey's attorneys argue that U.S. Attorney Lindsey Halligan's appointment was unlawful and orchestrated to indict their client without proper legal grounds.
  • They assert that the prosecution stems from Trump's long-standing hostility towards Comey, who has publicly criticized the president since 2017.
  • Comey has pleaded not guilty to charges of lying to Congress and obstruction, facing up to five years in prison if convicted.

Report an issue with this summary

Other (sources without bias rating):

Powered by Ground News™

Daily Newsletter

Start your day with fact-based news

Start your day with fact-based news

Learn more about our emails. Unsubscribe anytime.

By entering your email, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and acknowledge the Privacy Policy.