Staff Reports
The Department of Justice has unsealed a new criminal information charging Ex‑FBI Director James Comey with unlawfully disclosing national‑defense information. The short document accuses Comey of directing someone to hand classified material to a reporter in October 2016. This is the third federal criminal action against Comey, and the way the government filed the case — as an “information” rather than a grand‑jury indictment — is already the central fight in court.
New charges unsealed in Washington
The newly public two‑count criminal information, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, cites 18 U.S.C. § 793(d) and (g) for unauthorized transmission and conspiracy to transmit national‑defense information. The filing says Comey, while in lawful possession of national‑defense information, “knowingly and willfully” caused it to be communicated to a person not entitled to receive it, and that he directed an individual to disclose that information to a national reporter. The charging document was filed under seal on the ten‑year anniversary of the alleged conduct and was unsealed by U.S. District Judge Trevor McFadden after a court order. Comey posted a short video saying, “they’re back again,” that he is innocent, and his lawyers have already asked the court to dismiss the case.
Why the filing matters: method, timing, and stakes
This case is important for three reasons. First, it accuses a former head of the FBI of leaking national‑defense information — a rare and serious allegation. Second, prosecutors used a criminal “information” signed by DOJ lawyers instead of waiting for a grand‑jury indictment. That choice, and whether it can toll the ten‑year statute of limitations, is the legal fulcrum the defense is attacking. Third, the timing — filed under seal right around the ten‑year mark — raises obvious questions about whether the government is trying to preserve a stale case by shortcut. Call it what you want, but when the department files at the deadline without a grand jury, people notice.
What to watch next in court
Comey’s team argues the case should be tossed because the government failed to bring a timely indictment and that an information can’t cure that problem. DOJ says the information is legally valid and that dismissal would be premature. The judge will decide whether the statute of limitations bars the prosecution or whether the case can move forward to indictment, arraignment and discovery. If the court lets the case survive, prosecutors could ask a grand jury for a formal indictment; if the court dismisses, expect an appeal. This fight over procedure and time limits could set a precedent far beyond Mr. Comey.
Final thoughts
Whatever your politics, this is a moment when the rule of law should be plain and simple: powerful people answer to the same rules as everyone else. The Justice Department’s tactic and the timing deserve scrutiny, and so does Comey’s conduct if the allegations are proven. Let the court sort the legal knots, but the public has every right to demand transparency and evenhanded justice. No more soft landings for the well‑connected — that’s the idea of equal justice under law, not a late‑night TV punchline.
