Preamble;
James Comey, the former FBI Director who served from 2013 to 2017, has long been a controversial figure in American politics—a tall, stoic man with a lawman’s demeanor who positioned himself as a guardian of justice but repeatedly found himself at the center of scandals that smelled of political favoritism and cover-ups.
On September 25, 2025, a federal grand jury in the Eastern District of Virginia indicted Comey on two felony counts: making false statements (lying under oath) and obstruction of justice.
These charges stem from his congressional testimony in September 2020, where he denied involvement in leaking FBI information and obstructed inquiries into the origins of the Russia hoax probe.
The indictment, unsealed the following day (September 26, 2025), marks a stunning fall for Comey, who once led the nation’s premier law enforcement agency but now faces up to 10 years in prison if convicted.
This development vindicates early critics like the 2017 Havachat article “Chronic Obstruction Alert: James Comey & Barack Obama, Bones in the Throat of American Justice,” which accused Comey and Obama of obstructing justice to protect Hillary Clinton during the email server scandal.
That piece argued Comey exceeded his authority by exonerating Clinton in July 2016, despite evidence of mishandled classified info, and that Obama shifted the legal standard to “intent” to shield her.
Recent declassifications, particularly from DNI Tulsi Gabbard in July 2025 (e.g., the HPSCI report and Durham annex), have exposed Comey’s role in broader IC misconduct, including fabricating Russiagate narratives.
With a focus on intelligence agencies (CIA, FBI), think tanks (e.g., Atlantic Council, Brookings), and NGOs (e.g., OSF ties to Russiagate funding), this analysis unearths facts suggesting Comey’s actions were part of a pattern to protect elites, potentially opening doors to more charges.
We’ll list possible charges, explain them with context, and discuss how/why to bring them, drawing from declass, Havachat articles, and searches.
List and Explanation of Possible Charges Against James Comey
Based on exhaustive research—including Comey’s 2020 testimony, FBI internal memos, declass from Gabbard (2025), Durham Report (2023 annex), Senate Judiciary hearings, and media mentions in IC-linked think tanks (e.g., Brookings reports on Russiagate)—here are the key possible charges.
These stem from his roles in the Clinton email probe, Russiagate, and leaks. We’ll explain each with background, evidence, and relevance to NGOs/think tanks/IC.
Making False Statements/Perjury (18 U.S.C. § 1001 and § 1621):
Explanation: Lying under oath to Congress or federal investigators. The indictment charges Comey with false statements in his September 30, 2020, Senate Judiciary testimony, where he denied leaking FBI info and obstructed questions on Russiagate origins.
Perjury requires willfully false testimony under oath; false statements cover any deliberate lie to federal officials.
Context and Evidence: In 2020 testimony, Comey claimed no involvement in leaks to media (e.g., his 2017 memo leak to the New York Times via Daniel Richman, sparking Mueller probe). Declass Gabbard memos (July 2025) show Comey authorized leaks, contradicting his oath.
Durham annex (2023/2025) reveals Comey lied about Steele dossier’s use in ICA. Havachat 2017 article predicted this, accusing Comey of obstructing Clinton probe by drafting exoneration early (April 2016).
Think tank ties: Atlantic Council (Soros-funded) amplified Russiagate; Comey’s post-FBI speeches at Brookings (OSF-linked) pushed narrative.
Relevance to IC/NGOs: Comey’s lies protected Obama-era IC (Brennan/Clapper) from exposure, with OSF funding $1M to Fusion GPS for dossier (Gabbard declass). This shielded Soros’s donor class from scrutiny.
Obstruction of Justice (18 U.S.C. § 1505 and § 1512):
Explanation: Interfering with congressional or federal investigations. The indictment accuses Comey of obstructing Senate inquiries into Russiagate by misleading on leaks and dossier. Obstruction includes tampering with evidence or witnesses.
Context and Evidence: Comey’s 2017 memo leak (admitted under oath) aimed to trigger Mueller probe, per his testimony. Gabbard declass (2025) shows he withheld exculpatory info on Page (CIA asset).
Havachat 2017 called it “audacious obstruction,” noting Comey’s pre-interview exoneration draft for Clinton (May 2016). 2016 tarmac meeting with AG Lynch (Bill Clinton) and immunity deals for Mills/Samuelson (ignored evidence).
FBI ignored Weiner laptop emails (October 2016). Think tank/NGO: OSF-funded CAP (Tanden) pushed “Trump-Putin” smears; Comey’s Brookings ties post-FBI amplified.
Relevance: Obstruction protected Clinton/Obama, with Soros’s OSF/NED influencing IC narratives (e.g., $1M to Russiagate “research”).*
Mishandling Classified Information (18 U.S.C. § 793 and Executive Order 13526):
Explanation: Gross negligence in handling classified material, like leaking memos with sensitive info.
Context and Evidence: Comey’s memos (leaked 2017) contained classified details on Trump briefings. Gabbard declass (2025) shows he violated protocols.
Havachat 2018/05/01 links to CrowdStrike “Russian hack” hoax, where Comey ignored exfiltration evidence. Havachat 2018/02/20 details Podesta’s April 2016 “Trump-Russia” plan, with Comey enabling.
Relevance: Mirrors Clinton server scandal; Comey’s hypocrisy (clearing her, leaking himself). IC ties: Brennan/Clapper’s ICA fabrication (Gabbard declass).
Conspiracy (18 U.S.C. § 371):
Explanation: Agreement to commit offenses like obstruction or false statements.
Context and Evidence: Gabbard declass (2025 HPSCI report) shows Comey conspired with Brennan/Clapper to fabricate ICA (Jan 2017), using unverified Smolenkov “fragment.” Comey’s tarmac meeting knowledge and immunity deals suggest conspiracy to shield Clinton.
Havachat 2017 argues Obama/Comey conspired to obstruct email probe. Gabbard’s 2025 Durham annex reveals Comey ignored dossier flaws.
Relevance: Ties to Soros—OSF $1M to Fusion GPS (dossier), per declass; NGO/think tank (CAP) amplified hoax.
Leaking Classified Information (18 U.S.C. § 798):
Explanation: Unauthorized disclosure of classified intel.
Context and Evidence: Comey’s 2017 memo leak to NYT (via Richman) contained classified Trump discussions. Gabbard declass (2025) shows he admitted intent to trigger Mueller.
Havachat 2025/08/19 on WikiLeaks saga notes Comey ignored CrowdStrike’s no-exfiltration evidence, leaking to smear Trump.
Relevance: Protected Obama/Clinton; IC pattern of leaks (Brennan to CNN).
Election Interference (52 U.S.C. § 30121 and 18 U.S.C. § 241):
Explanation: Conspiring to interfere with elections or deprive rights.
Context and Evidence: Russiagate as hoax to derail Trump—Gabbard declass (2025) shows Comey knew dossier was bogus but used it.
Havachat 2018/02/20 details Podesta’s April 2016 plan, with Comey enabling. 2020 laptop suppression (Comey-signed letter calling it “disinfo”).
Relevance: Soros’s OSF $1M to Fusion GPS; NGO ties (CAP smears).
How and Why to Bring These Charges: A Discussion
To bring charges against Comey, prosecutors (e.g., U.S. Attorney for EDVA) would build on the September 25, 2025, indictment, using grand jury evidence from congressional transcripts, FBI memos, and declass. Here’s a detailed breakdown:
Building the Case: Start with perjury/obstruction as low-hanging fruit—2020 testimony contradictions (e.g., denying leaks, per Gabbard declass).
Expand via 18 U.S.C. § 371 for conspiracy, linking to Brennan/Clapper (HPSCI report shows ICA fabrication). Use Durham annex (2025) for dossier ignore. Why?
To expose IC abuse, restore trust—Gabbard’s releases provide “smoking gun” docs. Motive: Comey’s actions protected elites (Obama/Clinton), per Havachat 2017—Obama’s April 2016 “careless” statement shifted standard.
Soros tie: OSF $1M to Russiagate “research,” per declass, suggesting donor class protection.
Challenges and Strategy: Classified info barriers—Gabbard declass helps, but Comey could claim “national security.” Prosecutors use whistleblowers (e.g., FBI agents ignored in email probe). Why now?
Political shift under Trump 2.0 (2025), with Gabbard as DNI unearthing facts.
Benefits: Accountability for IC overreach, exposing think tanks/NGOs like CAP/OSF in smears.
by Brendan Power
Leave a Reply