The Once-Untouchable FBI Director Tries a Familiar Trick
Former FBI Director James Comey — once hailed by the media as a “guardian of democracy” and later exposed as one of the architects of the Trump-Russia hoax — is once again trying to escape accountability.
This week, Comey’s legal team filed a motion to dismiss the federal charges against him, claiming that his indictment was politically motivated and rooted in President Donald Trump’s personal vendetta.
It’s a predictable move — the classic Washington defense: When you can’t argue the facts, cry politics.
Comey’s filing comes after a federal grand jury charged him with making false statements to Congress and obstructing a congressional proceeding related to his 2020 testimony about the FBI’s handling of the 2016 Trump campaign investigation.
The charges mark a stunning turn for the man who once led the Bureau — and who, by many accounts, weaponized it against a sitting president.
Comey’s Defense: ‘Trump Hates Me’
In the motion filed Monday, Comey’s attorney Patrick Fitzgerald argued that the indictment “represents an egregious abuse of power” and should be thrown out immediately.
Fitzgerald’s central claim? That President Trump’s alleged animosity toward Comey influenced prosecutors to bring the case.
“President Trump posted a statement on social media that provides smoking-gun evidence that this prosecution would not have occurred but for the President’s animus toward Mr. Comey,” Fitzgerald wrote, citing a September 20 Truth Social post in which Trump called for the “immediate prosecution of corrupt actors who lied to Congress and abused their positions of power.”
The filing calls the indictment a “vindictive and selective prosecution” — a phrase used so often in Washington it’s practically boilerplate at this point.
Fitzgerald also took aim at Lindsey Halligan, the lead prosecutor and former Trump legal adviser, alleging that her appointment was improper and politically motivated:
“The eleventh-hour appointment of a political ally for the express purpose of prosecuting a longtime critic, accompanied by a social media post pushing the DOJ to indict — is decisive evidence that the government would not have prosecuted Mr. Comey but for his ‘expression of ideas’ that President Trump disliked,” Fitzgerald wrote.
In other words, Comey’s defense boils down to this: You can’t prosecute me because the president doesn’t like me.
A Familiar Pattern — and a Weak Argument
This line of defense may sound compelling to pundits, but legally speaking, it’s shaky at best.
“Selective prosecution” claims rarely succeed unless a defendant can prove that similarly situated individuals were treated differently for no legitimate reason.
But that’s where Comey’s argument falls apart.
Under President Biden, the Department of Justice prosecuted Donald Trump himself — twice — on charges that most legal scholars acknowledged were politically motivated, flimsy, and historically unprecedented.
If the Biden DOJ could indict a former president (and current political opponent) on paper-thin cases and call that “equal justice under the law,” Comey’s attempt to claim he’s the victim of selective prosecution is laughable.
As one former federal prosecutor put it:
“The same people who said ‘no one is above the law’ when Trump was indicted can’t suddenly argue that James Comey should be. That’s not how justice works — at least not anymore.”
The Charges Against Comey
Comey faces two central allegations:
-
Lying to Congress during a 2020 Senate Intelligence Committee hearing about the origins and conduct of the FBI’s Crossfire Hurricane investigation into the Trump campaign.
-
Obstructing a congressional proceeding by allegedly withholding or altering documents related to the Bureau’s surveillance of former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA).
The indictment, according to court filings, cites discrepancies between Comey’s sworn testimony and internal FBI memos, as well as communications between senior Bureau officials.
Investigators claim Comey knew key evidence had been discredited — including the infamous Steele dossier — yet continued to testify publicly as if it were credible.
Those actions, prosecutors argue, obstructed congressional oversight and misled the American public about the FBI’s conduct.
Comey’s Credibility Problem
This isn’t the first time James Comey has been accused of bending the rules.
-
In 2016, he famously rewrote the FBI’s findings in the Hillary Clinton email probe, softening the language in the final statement to avoid recommending criminal charges.
-
In 2017, he admitted to leaking classified memos to the media through a friend, hoping to trigger the appointment of a special counsel (which ultimately became Robert Mueller).
-
In 2019, the DOJ’s Inspector General concluded that Comey violated FBI policy by removing official memos and storing them at home — but declined to prosecute.
In short, Comey has built a career on walking the line between legality and politics. But this time, prosecutors say, he crossed it.
The Irony: The Man Who Started It All
Comey’s downfall is, in many ways, poetic.
He was the man who launched the investigation that crippled Trump’s first term — a probe built on false intelligence, partisan sources, and circular leaks.
He framed his actions as noble, even righteous. He told Congress he acted “by the book.” He wrote a memoir, A Higher Loyalty, painting himself as a victim of Trump’s supposed authoritarianism.
But as time went on, evidence mounted showing that Comey’s FBI manipulated the system — approving secret surveillance warrants on flimsy evidence, leaking to the press, and shaping public perception ahead of a presidential election.
Now, the same justice system he once controlled is coming for him.
Media Defenses Already Underway
Predictably, the media is rallying to Comey’s side. Outlets like Politico, CNN, and The Washington Post are framing the indictment as “revenge” — not accountability.
It’s the same narrative they pushed during Trump’s first impeachment and every subsequent investigation: if a Republican does it, it’s corruption; if a Democrat does it, it’s justice.
But the difference this time is the political climate. After four years of border chaos, economic turmoil, and evidence of Biden administration corruption, Americans’ patience with “two-tier justice” has worn thin.
A recent Rasmussen poll found that 64% of voters now believe there is “a politically motivated double standard” in how federal law enforcement handles cases involving Democrats versus Republicans.
Comey’s attempt to play the martyr will likely only deepen that perception.
Comey’s Team Hints at a Media Tour
Sources close to the defense tell reporters that Comey may soon “speak publicly” about the charges, possibly through a major network interview or a series of op-eds.
He’s already hinted on social media that he plans to “defend the rule of law” and “expose abuses of power” — lines reminiscent of his earlier PR strategy after being fired by Trump in 2017.
But that approach could backfire.
Unlike the political scandals of years past, this is a criminal case, not a media narrative. Judges don’t care about book deals or hashtags. They care about evidence — and the evidence against Comey, according to prosecutors, is substantial.
The Larger Message
If nothing else, the Comey indictment sends a clear signal: the days of the FBI policing itself are over.
For years, conservatives have demanded accountability for officials who abused surveillance powers, leaked classified materials, and interfered in elections.
Now, under a Justice Department restructured by Trump’s second-term reforms, those demands are finally being met.
“No one is above the law,” Trump said in a recent interview. “Not presidents, not agents, not FBI directors — nobody. That’s the standard the American people deserve.”
And he’s right.
Conclusion: The Walls Are Closing In
Comey’s motion to dismiss is a last-ditch effort to delay the inevitable.
He can cry politics all he wants, but justice doesn’t stop because a defendant is famous.
The man who once wielded the nation’s most powerful law enforcement agency against his political enemies is now facing that same agency’s power himself.
It’s poetic, it’s ironic — and it’s long overdue.
Comey spent years telling Americans that “truth matters.”
Now, finally, it’s time for him to live by his own words.
Ethan Blake is a skilled Creative Content Specialist with a talent for crafting engaging and thought-provoking narratives. With a strong background in storytelling and digital content creation, Ethan brings a unique perspective to his role at TheArchivists, where he curates and produces captivating content for a global audience.
Ethan holds a degree in Communications from Zurich University, where he developed his expertise in storytelling, media strategy, and audience engagement. Known for his ability to blend creativity with analytical precision, he excels at creating content that not only entertains but also connects deeply with readers.
At TheArchivists, Ethan specializes in uncovering compelling stories that reflect a wide range of human experiences. His work is celebrated for its authenticity, creativity, and ability to spark meaningful conversations, earning him recognition among peers and readers alike.
Passionate about the art of storytelling, Ethan enjoys exploring themes of culture, history, and personal growth, aiming to inspire and inform with every piece he creates. Dedicated to making a lasting impact, Ethan continues to push boundaries in the ever-evolving world of digital content.