How Trump’s Chosen US Attorney Boldly Pursued Charges Against Comey Despite DOJ Resistance | CNN Politics

Lindsey Halligan, selected by President Donald Trump, stepped into a challenging role as the U.S. attorney. Recently, she faced the grand jury for the first time, seeking an indictment against former FBI Director James Comey. Despite skepticism from the Justice Department about the strength of the case, Halligan managed to convince the jury to bring charges on two counts out of three.

Many inside the Justice Department thought the evidence was weak. Halligan didn’t receive help from higher-ups, and even her request for a paralegal was denied. One insider remarked, “Lindsey was set up to fail.”

Yet, Halligan, a former private attorney for Trump, surprised her critics. If the indictment had failed, it could have hurt Trump’s campaign against perceived political enemies.

White House spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt expressed support for Halligan, stating that Trump stands firmly behind her and the rest of the team working to restore accountability in the justice system. A DOJ spokesperson reiterated that Halligan has full backing from the upper echelons of the department.

Trump’s directive to prosecute Comey intensified the scrutiny on Halligan. When she took over the role, preparations were already fraught with tension. Halligan had to get up to speed quickly, often without the standard support typically available to federal prosecutors.

She practiced extensively, going through evidence with FBI attorneys and agents leading the investigation. Even though she had limited courtroom experience, Halligan took the reins during her presentation. Ultimately, her efforts paid off, and the grand jury returned two counts against Comey.

However, the indictment wasn’t without issues. There were discrepancies in the documents Halligan submitted to the court, which confused the judge during the hearing. The judge noted that it was unusual for such a problem to arise.

Despite the challenges, Halligan’s success in obtaining an indictment is indicative of a shift in how some grand juries are responding to cases perceived as politically charged. Uniquely, during Trump’s presidency, grand juries have occasionally pushed back against what they see as overreach by the Justice Department, declining to issue indictments in other situations.

As Halligan prepares for the upcoming prosecution, there are considerable obstacles ahead. Perjury cases, especially those involving Congress, can be tricky. Lawmakers often falter in their questioning, making it harder to prove wrongdoing. Additionally, Trump’s comments and the context surrounding Halligan’s appointment might provide fertile ground for a defense that claims the prosecution is politically motivated.

In the coming weeks, it remains unclear who will ultimately lead the prosecution in court. The direction of this case could have major implications not just for Comey, but also for the political landscape surrounding Trump and his allies.



Source link