James Comey Indicted on Obstruction, False Statements; Durham’s Prior Findings Undercut Prosecution’s Case
James Comey Indicted on Obstruction, False Statements; Durham’s Prior Findings Undercut Prosecution’s Case
Former FBI Director James Comey was indicted last month on two charges of making false statements to Congress and obstruction, despite earlier findings by former special counsel John Durham that he was unable to uncover sufficient evidence to support such charges.
Sources familiar with the matter told ABC News that Durham, who spent nearly four years investigating the origins of the FBI’s probe into Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign, informed federal prosecutors in August 2025 that his extensive investigation yielded no evidence to substantiate false statements or obstruction charges against Comey. This revelation could become a pivotal point for Comey’s defense.
The indictment, pushed forward by U.S. Attorney Lindsey Halligan for the Eastern District of Virginia, comes after multiple teams of prosecutors, including those in Washington D.C. who investigated Comey for years, reached the same conclusion as Durham: there was insufficient evidence to prove Comey made false statements to Congress or obstructed their investigation. Prosecutors in Virginia, after their own two-month review, also recommended against charges in a lengthy declination memo, explicitly citing Durham’s findings and the D.C. prosecutors’ conclusions.
Despite this widespread skepticism from experienced prosecutors, Halligan, a Trump appointee, rejected the recommendation and sought a three-count indictment. A grand jury ultimately indicted Comey on two counts, while rejecting an additional false statements count.
The politically charged case unfolds as former President Trump continues to call for charges against his political adversaries. Following the indictment, Trump stated, “I hope there are others, because you can’t let this happen to a country.” However, the circumstances surrounding the prosecution, including the internal DOJ opposition and Durham’s prior assessment, are expected to bolster arguments that Comey was politically targeted and highlight the inherent weaknesses of the case.
The charges against Comey reportedly center on his testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee in 2020, specifically allegations that he lied about approving leaks to the media and his awareness of an unverified intelligence report linking Trump’s campaign to Russia. Durham’s team had specifically investigated Comey’s testimony regarding the intelligence report but concluded they could not support false statements charges, as evidence never fully established Comey had seen the report.
Disclaimer: This content is aggregated from public sources online. Please verify information independently. If you believe your rights have been infringed, contact us for removal.