Judge who reviewed James Comey's indictment was confused by prosecutor's handling of case, transcript shows
U.S. Magistrate Judge Lindsey Vaala expressed confusion and surprise at some points during the seven-minute court session when a federal grand jury impaneled in Alexandria, Virginia, returned the indictment of former FBI Director James Comey Thursday night.
According to a transcript of the proceedings obtained by CBS News, Judge Vaala asked the newly named interim U.S. Attorney Lindsey Halligan — a former Trump personal lawyer — why there were two versions of the indictment.
A majority of the grand jury that reviewed the Comey matter voted not to charge him with one of the three counts presented by prosecutors, according to a form that was signed by the grand jury's foreperson and filed in court. He was indicted on two other counts — making false statements to Congress and obstructing a congressional proceeding — after 14 of 23 jurors voted in favor of them, the foreperson told the judge.
But two versions of the indictment were published on the case docket: one with the dropped third count, and one without. The transcript reveals why this occurred.
"So this has never happened before. I've been handed two documents that are in the Mr. Comey case that are inconsistent with one another," Vaala said to Halligan. "There seems to be a discrepancy. They're both signed by the (grand jury) foreperson."
And she noted that one document did not clearly indicate what the grand jury had decided.
"The one that says it's a failure to concur in an indictment, it doesn't say with respect to one count," Vaala said. "It looks like they failed to concur across all three counts, so I'm a little confused as to why I was handed two things with the same case number that are inconsistent."
Halligan initially responded that she hadn't seen that version of the indictment.
"So I only reviewed the one with the two counts that our office redrafted when we found out about the two — two counts that were true billed, and I signed that one. I did not see the other one. I don't know where that came from," Halligan told the judge.
Vaala responded, "You didn't see it?" And Halligan again told her, "I did not see that one."
Vaala seemed surprised: "So your office didn't prepare the indictment that they —"
Halligan then replied, "No, no, no — I — no, I prepared three counts. I only signed the one — the two-count (indictment). I don't know which one with three counts you have in your hands."
"Okay. It has your signature on it," Vaala told Halligan, who responded, "Okay. Well."
Vaala also noted that the court session began unusually late, at 6:47 p.m. Thursday evening, telling the grand jurors "I don't think we've ever met this late" as she thanked them for their service.
The charges against Comey — which accuse him of lying in testimony he gave to the Senate in 2020 — mark an unprecedented step for the Justice Department, after President Trump publicly urged prosecutors to look into the ex-FBI leader that he fired in 2017 and sparred with for years.
In an unusual move, Comey's indictment was personally signed by Halligan, not a rank-and-file federal prosecutor. Halligan was sworn in on Monday, after days of upheaval in the U.S. attorney's office in Alexandria.
The former head of the office, Erik Siebert, announced his resignation on Friday following worries among his staff that he could be fired for failing to criminally charge another Trump adversary, New York Attorney General Letitia James. A day later, Mr. Trump announced Siebert had been fired, and posted a message suggesting Attorney General Pam Bondi should look into Comey, James and a third longtime Trump foil, Democratic Sen. Adam Schiff of California.
Before Comey was indicted, staff at the U.S. attorney's office circulated a memo that argued charges should not be brought against the former FBI director, a Justice Department source familiar with the matter told CBS News.
Attorney General Pam Bondi praised Halligan in a post on X Friday, writing that she "did an outstanding job."