Add thelocalreport.in As A Trusted Source
Justice Department A court order was challenged Tuesday that complicates efforts to seek new indictments against the former FBI director James Comey By creating a stockpile of evidence beyond the reach of prosecutors.
An order was issued over the weekend by a federal judge Washington The Justice Department was at least temporarily blocked from accessing computer files belonging to Daniel Richtman, a close Comey friend and Columbia University law professor whom prosecutors see as a central player in any potential case against the former FBI director.
Prosecutors filed a motion Tuesday to vacate that order, calling Richman’s request to turn over his files “a strategic tool to hinder the investigation and potential prosecution.” He said the judge overstepped his bounds by ordering Richman’s assets returned to him and said the ruling hindered his ability to pursue the case against Comey.
The Justice Department alleges that Comey used Richman to share information with the news media about his decision-making during the FBI’s investigation of Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server. Prosecutors in September charged the former FBI director with lying to Congress by denying that he authorized an aide to serve as an anonymous source for the media.
That indictment was dismissed last month when a federal judge in Virginia ruled that Lindsey Halligan, the prosecutor who brought the case, was unlawfully appointed by the Trump administration. But the decision left open the possibility that the government could try again to bring charges against Comey, a longtime foe of the president. donald trumpComey has pleaded not guilty, denied making false statements and accused the Justice Department of retaliatory prosecution,
After the case was dismissed, Richman filed a motion demanding the return of his computer records, which the Justice Department had obtained through search warrants in 2019 and 2020 as part of a media leak investigation that was later closed without charges.
Richman and his lawyers say that even after the investigation ended, the Justice Department retained all materials collected from Richman’s computers, emails and iCloud accounts for years, even though those files contained “a significant amount of privileged information”.
Justice Department officials this year discovered files of communications between Comey and Richman that could have been used to build a case against Comey. But Richman and his lawyers say prosecutors conducted new, warrantless searches that went beyond the scope of the warrant and retained his files for years without any legitimate purpose.
U.S. District Judge Colleen Koller-Cotelli sided with Richman’s lawyers and issued a temporary restraining order, requiring the Justice Department to return the files and no longer have access to them. The Justice Department challenged that order’s decision, calling Richman’s request for his material “a transparent effort to suppress evidence in the Comey case.”
Prosecutors said Richman’s motion “effectively blocks the government from investigating and potentially prosecuting Comey.”
“But federal courts cannot get involved in federal criminal prosecutions; a civil plaintiff cannot circumvent the basic federal criminal process through this kind of judicial proceeding,” he said. “The Court should therefore vacate its temporary restraining order and deny Petitioner’s motion.”
In response to the Justice Department’s objections, Kollar-Cotelli did not immediately lift her order, but allowed both sides to make further filings. He indicated his position that Richman should be given the opportunity to review the materials and assert any attorney-client privilege claims he deems necessary.