Return to Transcripts main page
Erin Burnett Outfront
Ex-FBI Chief Comey Charged With Making False Statements, Obstruction. Aired 7-8p ET
Aired September 25, 2025 - 19:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[19:00:16]
ANNOUNCER: This is CNN breaking news.
ERIN BURNETT, CNN HOST: Good evening. I'm Erin Burnett.
And OUTFRONT tonight, we have breaking news. The former FBI director, James Comey, has just been indicted by a federal grand jury, an extraordinary escalation in President Trump's effort to prosecute political enemies.
Attorney General Pam Bondi posting on social media just a couple of moments ago, here as this news is breaking as we speak, she posted, no one is above the law. Today's indictment reflects this Department of Justice's commitment to holding those who abuse positions of power accountable for misleading the American people. We will follow the facts in this case. Again, that's from the attorney general, Pam Bondi.
And a source tells us now that Comey has been charged specifically with two things, okay, giving false statements. So, lying to Congress and that testimony, you may remember that exchange with Ted Cruz, lying to Congress and charging him with obstruction of justice.
So, we understand these are the two charges. I'm saying this as we understand this do not yet have the official charging documents in hand awaiting those any second, but those are the two charges as we understand them.
So, I want to get straight to Evan Perez in Washington.
Evan, what are you learning about this right now? Breaking right now as we're awaiting those charging documents?
EVAN PEREZ, CNN SENIOR JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Yeah, exactly, Erin. What we do know is that there are two counts that he was charged with, that he's been indicted on by the grand jury in the Eastern District of Virginia. And one of them is the false statements charge. Presumably that has to do with his congressional testimony. And the second is, is an obstruction charge. And that has to do with obstruction of a congressional proceeding.
Again, these are the two charges that we know of at this point. Again, we haven't read the documents yet because they have not been provided yet by the Justice Department. So this is basically what we know from sources telling our Hannah Rabinowitz, who's at the Justice Department at this moment.
Erin, this was -- has been a whirlwind day, obviously, and a historic day. We've never had an FBI director indicted for crimes in this country before, and we certainly have never seen a situation like this where the president of the United States has been essentially campaigning publicly to have this person indicted because he believes that he is a political enemy. So that's part of the context of what we're dealing with here today.
We do know that prosecutors went into the grand jury in Alexandria today, and, a couple hours after being in there, they were -- we saw the grand jurors leave the court courtroom. This afternoon, we had our reporters there on scene. And so, the question was, what happened in the -- in the vote.
So, now, we know that they indicted on these two counts. We don't know what else happened. We don't know who presented the case, Erin, because one of the questions today was whether, you know, whether prosecutors in that office would actually go forward with presenting a case that they themselves had concerns over, had doubts over -- Erin.
BURNETT: All right. So, Evan, you know, as we await this, and I think that's a really crucial question. I just want to ask you, because we know the president had posted himself on his own social media website over the weekend. You know, that he had fired the person that he actually appointed in the eastern district of Virginia, who would have been in charge of making this decision, because that individual did not think that he had a case. And then he said, he's going, you know, suggested to Pam Bondi, Lindsey Halligan is a really good lawyer.
We can't delay any longer. Lindsey Halligan is now in that job. Obviously, this just took a couple of days for all that to happen, but these documents were really -- were obviously ready very quickly. So, is there anything you can read in those tea leaves?
PEREZ: Right. Well, exactly. I mean, Lindsey Halligan is the third U.S. attorney in that district since Friday. He fired Eric Siebert on Friday in because -- in part because Siebert had been objecting to a particular case, including the case of Tish James that they have an investigation for alleged mortgage fraud allegations. And the prosecutors in the office had objected to it, in part because they say they didn't have any evidence for it.
And that's the reason why he fired Erik Siebert. He later said that it was because Siebert had the support of two Democrats, but that really is not part of the reason. We do know that over the weekend, he had appointed another -- the White House had appointed another prosecutor, Maggie Cleary, to take over the office. And then the president announced that he was sending his former personal attorney, Lindsey Halligan, to take over.
She took -- she was sworn in on Monday and has been getting briefed. We know that over the last couple of days, Erin, Lindsey Halligan has been at the Justice Department. We've known that she's met with the attorney general, Pam Bondi.
[19:05:05]
This has been front and center as part of those conversations. We know that the attorney general herself had some of the misgivings about this, about this case in part because those prosecutors, the career lawyers in that office believe that there were some deficiencies, right? Again, what we're told is that they viewed this case as certainly one that could be brought, but that there were enough deficiencies that it raised some concerns there.
Clearly, they've gone to the grand jury now, and they've gotten at least two counts approved by the grand jurors. And now we will get to a trial, right? This is a case that obviously will be sometime in the making. We expect that Comey's attorneys will quickly go to the judge and say this is a case of malicious prosecution because the president of the United States has kind of helped them really write that brief, right?
BURNETT: Yeah.
PEREZ: That is something that they are going to be able to make -- they're going to go to the court and look, those motions almost never succeed. They're very difficult to bring. But in this case, the president of United States has sort of made it a lot easier for them.
BURNETT: So even if this were to go to trial and as you say, those -- those efforts to have it perhaps not go to trial would ordinarily be a very high hurdle. We'll see in this case. But if it were to go to trial in the context of what you said, that we've never had an FBI director in the United States indicted for a crime, and here we are making history in that regard.
What would the -- what would the punishment be if convicted for the crime in this case of lying to congress and obstruction of justice?
PEREZ: Right. These are serious charges. I mean, these are felonies. These were -- these would definitely be carry at least a five-year -- well, they would carry a five-year maximum sentence under federal law.
Now, we don't know that that would actually be. What would -- what a sentence would, would bring, obviously because, Comey is, has never been charged with anything before. He's never committed a crime that we know of before. So, you know, it's not likely that that's what -- what's going to happen.
And we're a long way from that, right? I mean, that's what the statutory maximum is for these -- for these -- for these charges. But look, this is a very -- this is a very serious case, and these are very serious charges that are being brought against the former FBI director. And this is something that has been investigated for some time.
The John Durham, who was a special counsel during the first term of President Trump under Bill Barr, had looked at some of these very allegations, looked at some of this testimony, and came away deciding not to bring a case. Clearly, the Justice Department in the Trump second term has taken another look and they've come away with a different with a different view, and they've done so with just days to spare. Keep in mind that the statute of limitations were expiring on Tuesday, and this grand jury today was their final day before the next -- the next grand jury would have been sitting, would have been on Tuesday, Erin, which would have been exceedingly close to that deadline.
Remember this -- this testimony occurred on September 30th in 2020. If you see that video, that's -- that's during the COVID period, right. And Comey was testifying remotely from his home in Virginia.
BURNETT: Absolutely. As we have seen, I'm going to play again in just a moment.
Evan, thank you very much. Of course, everyone can see him -- can see him there for that testimony.
As Evan gets more, he's going to come back to us. I will just say, Evan, as you're hearing,
Alayna Treene is at the White House going to be joining us in just a moment.
We did get a statement from the Department of Justice, although we do not yet have those court documents. But in it, Lindsey Halligan now the U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, who is Evan was just laying out, is the one who, brought these charges, says the charges, as alleged in this case, represent a breach of the public trust at an extraordinary level. They are noting, as you heard, Evan, just reporting, that if convicted, Comey faces up to five years in prison.
Alayna Treene is at the White House.
And, Alayna, this is clearly -- it could not be more clear. This is something Trump has said again and again and again that he wants as recently as this weekend in his post, when he talked about bringing charges against several individuals, including Jim Comey, Adam shifty Schiff and Letitia James.
What are you learning about the Comey charges here?
ALAYNA TREENE, CNN WHITE HOUSE REPORTER: Yeah. Look, this is something we know that the president has been wanting, and he hasn't just been urging this. This isn't just, you know, reporting that we have which we do, which is that he has been pressuring and urging the attorney general, Pam Bondi, to bring these charges against Comey.
He said it publicly in that post over the weekend. But one thing that I think is important to make clear and the context around this. We know that behind closed doors, and I know this, Erin, from my conversations with White House officials, that the president has often lamented that his Justice Department is not bringing, hasn't been bringing charges against senior government officials or really political opponents that he views.
[19:10:14] He argues, behind closed doors to them, that no charges were brought against him. Indictments were brought against him when he was out of office, and that they deserve to have charges brought against them, too. And I will point you to someone. I just caught up with the White House official. They are so far waiting to see what the president says on truth social, but they did they did point me to some of what the president said today when he was in the oval office with the Turkish President Erdogan.
He essentially said, I can only say that Comey is a bad person. He's a -- he's a sick person. He did terrible things.
This is the mindset of the president. He is long viewed Comey as kind of an enemy of his, really. And this is something he has been wanting now for several months since taking office. And you heard Evan talk a lot about Lindsey Halligan, the new top prosecutor in the Eastern District of Virginia. She was recently put in that role.
Part of that is she's a former personal attorney of the president, but she's also a grenade thrower. And I think it is no coincidence, of course, that she was just brought into this role and is now the one overseeing this indictment. And so, I think it's important to keep all of that context in mind.
And then the other thing we do have as well is something that we saw Attorney General Pam Bondi post on X shortly after we learned and reported of this indictment, where she appears to confirm it. She said that no one is above the law and that today's indictment reflects the Department of Justice's commitment to holding those who abuse positions of power accountable for misleading the American people. We will follow the facts in this case.
So, a lot more to come on this, but I can tell you, I'm certain that people in this White House behind me, the president, are going to be celebrating this after he's been really pushing this, despite the concerns that we know some people in the DOJ who are handling this have had.
BURNETT: All right. Thank you very much.
And as Alayna was speaking, the United States Department of Justice, both Pamela Bondi, the attorney general, and the current FBI director, Kash Patel, issued a statement in which they described these charges -- again, we don't have the charging documents, but they describe it. The indictment alleges that Comey obstructed a congressional investigation into the disclosure of sensitive information, and the indictment also alleges Comey made a false statement in violation of the law. And Comey stated that he did not authorize someone at the FBI to be an anonymous source. According to the indictment, that statement was false.
Ty Cobb joins me on the phone now.
So, Ty, here we are. Evan, putting it so aptly that never in the history of the United States has a director of the FBI been indicted for a crime. Here we are, James Comey has been indicted for two -- lying to Congress and obstruction of justice. I just read how it was described by the attorney general and the director of the FBI.
What do you see here?
TY COBB, FORMER TRUMP WHITE HOUSE LAWYER (via telephone): Well, I think this is a tragic day for America, not because Comey's perfect by any means. But what we have here is a clear, vindictive prosecution, a clear, selective prosecution. We have a president for the first time in history ordering his attorney general to indict his enemies. And the attorney general, instead of being the independent force that she's supposed to be, saying, yes, sir. How fast can I get that done for you?
I think if she's concerned about justice for people who have misled the country reflection on her confirmation proceedings is probably in order because she talked about evenhanded justice. And this is not that.
I think that the case is subject to motions to dismiss for vindictive prosecution and selective prosecution. I think likewise, it's a very weak case, at least based on what we publicly know. And we publicly know an unusual amount about this case --
BURNETT: Yes.
COBB: -- because of the Justice Department internal, inspector general's investigation, where he found the person that called me allegedly authorized to leak the information, not credible. And found that Comey was credible. So, I think this is -- this is a very problematic case for the government to bring, but I think the way in which they brought it is problematic for the entire country.
And this is either the end of the rule of law in America or it's a tipping point against the authoritarian activity that we've seen from this president and his attorney general.
BURNETT: In what way would it be a tipping point in that direction, Ty? I mean, I'm just looking at the situation. If you take a step back, you say, well, the U.S. attorney in the Eastern District of Virginia who didn't -- who said he didn't have enough information to prosecute Letitia James and New York attorney general within days, when Trump posted, he's gone -- he's gone, replaced by Trump personal attorney who has never prosecuted a case in her career.
[19:15:08]
That's who's bringing these charges. So, somebody might look at this and say, okay, how could this end up being a tipping point where it goes the other direction? How could that go?
COBB: So, I think the groundswell, you know, among the citizenry here could be enormous. I mean, this -- this is unprecedented. It's what every law student is told is not possible. And what distinguishes us from dictatorships around the world that, you know, the executive branch does not dictate -- the executive leading the executive branch does not dictate to prosecutors who will and will not be charged. Now, you know, were seeing that as Tom Homan, you know, reaches into
his paper bag to spend his $50,000 tonight. You know, he's not being charged. But Comey who the president has serious problems with is, I think this is a very, very possible tipping point for Americans to finally acknowledge the people who have been in constant denial about the damage that Trump is doing and the freedoms that are being eroded -- I think this is an opportunity for those people to wake up and take it seriously.
BURNETT: So, Ty, I want to play again. You know, at the heart of this, you say we know a lot about it. We know a lot about it because there was a full investigation into what Comey testified to Congress in that Zoom interview, right when the question was about a leak, right? And a leak that also had been testified on by at that time, the deputy director of the FBI, Mr. McCabe, who had said that Comey knew about a leak and Comey had said that he did not know about the leak prior to the leak. He has stuck with this all the way. This has been inspected.
But let me just play the exchange with Ted Cruz that may be at the heart of this, but this is the question of what Comey knew about the leak and what he authorized about the leak. Here it is.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. TED CRUZ (R-TX): On May 3rd, 2017, in this committee, Chairman Grassley asked you point blank, quote, "Have you ever been an anonymous source in news reports about matters relating to the Trump investigation or the Clinton investigation?" You responded under oath, quote, "Never." He then asked you, quote, "Have you ever authorized someone else at the FBI to be an anonymous source in news reports about the Trump investigation or the Clinton administration?" You responded again under oath, "No."
Now, as you know, Mr. McCabe, who works for you, has publicly and repeatedly stated that he leaked information to "The Wall Street Journal" and that you were directly aware of it and that you directly authorized it.
Now what Mr. McCabe is saying and what you testified to this committee cannot both be true. One or the other is false. Who's telling the truth?
JAMES COMEY, FORMER FBI DIRECTOR: I can only speak to my testimony. I stand by what? The testimony you summarized that I gave in May of 2017.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BURNETT: Ty, that's very much at the heart of this. I want to emphasize he stood by it. And as you say, there was an investigation into that which did not conclude wrongdoing on the part of the former FBI Director Comey.
In that context, when you look at the fact that there was an investigation, that it reached that conclusion, and now we have charges saying that that that, that none of that is right. And we're looking at the first time we've ever seen an FBI director indicted for a crime.
What does that context do to this? Due to the seriousness of this case?
COBB: Oh, the seriousness of this case could not be more extreme. This is -- this is unprecedented. Not just because it's an FBI, former FBI director, but because everybody in America knows they've seen what Trump ordered Bondi to do in writing. You know, indict my enemy.
BURNETT: Yeah.
COBB: And that that is un-American. Thats never happened in America before. It's not supposed to happen in America.
So, the intensity of this case is extreme, but I think the weakness of the evidence is highlighted by what you just mentioned, which is it's a he said -- he said/he said case and, you know, I mean, McCabe is not a great witness as the Horowitz report reflects. Comey, you know, has some issues in terms of his own credibility, but this is going to be a very difficult case if it ever got to a jury, for a jury to convict on under the -- under the standard that's applicable of no reasonable doubt.
BURNETT: All right. Ty Cobb, thank you very much.
And I want to go to our team here. Ryan Goodman, legal expert, Rebecca Roiphe is a former prosecutor; and Xochitl Hinojosa worked at the DOJ under AG Garland.
[19:20:02]
David Frum is also with us, of course, worked under President George W. Bush.
So, I appreciate all of you.
Ryan, you heard, Ty, there talking about, you know, what, this getting to a jury, will it get to a jury? And I guess that's the bottom-line question. You got the indictment, which nobody should be surprised to see, given that the president had made his wishes here very clear and put his own personal attorney in charge of it.
So, you got the indictment now. The question is, will it get to a jury, Ryan?
RYAN GOODMAN, FORMER SPECIAL COUNSEL AT DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE: It's not clear that it will. Mr. Comey has a very strong argument that he can make at the outset about selective prosecution. And it is a very hard case to make. So selective prosecution. But it's hard to think of a stronger example of it when the president of the United States is actually basically saying, here's the person, find me the crime.
And that's been dating back to 2017. He's been calling for James Comey to be criminally investigated publicly since 2018. So, I think that's a serious issue. And there's also evidence, besides what's already been reported, that the prosecutors have a weak case on their hands. There's some reporting tonight that the prosecutors actually sought three charges and only got back two, which also indicates, if that's true, that the jury was not exactly open to this presentation that they gave them. That's another evidence of weakness in including, like, "Wall Street Journal" reporting last night that the prosecutors in the Eastern District of Virginia had, in fact, thought that there wasn't sufficient evidence to charge him, let alone to convict him.
BURNETT: And, you know, Xochitl, our own reporting here at CNN mirror some of that, that's Ryan's talking about -- about the Attorney General Bondi herself, that she was, okay to bring an indictment in the context of an indictment generally being easy to obtain from a grand jury, but that she did not feel as confident had had more concerns or cold feet about actually bringing the case itself. If that is true, Xochitl, what does that say?
XOCHITL HINOJOSA, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: That just says that there is no case here. That says that Pam Bondi had doubts about whether or not a grand jury were to indict, and that is a low bar to bring a case to a grand jury and have them indict. That is a pretty low bar for that.
What is a higher bar is to convict, and I think that's what she is also worried about. She is likely worried that they are not going to be successful in this case, that they don't have enough evidence to bring this case. What she -- what this is, is a political decision. I -- my two tenures at the Justice Department have never seen an attorney general make a decision on who to prosecute or who not to prosecute. It always comes from the career officials of the justice department. Here it was clear that she needed to follow orders by Donald Trump to indict James Comey, just because he is a political enemy.
And I think this is the first time, through CNN's reporting, that she had some doubts that she was potentially breaking with Donald Trump. So, she is having to balance right now the job of the attorney general and following the facts and the law with the loyalty of Donald Trump. And I do not envy her. But if she did not move forward with this indictment, I would not be surprised if Donald Trump would fire her and try to get someone else.
He has made clear that he wants certain people indicted because they are his political enemies. And pam Bondi today just showed us that she will do exactly that.
BURNETT: And obviously, his post over the weekend made it clear -- Comey, Adam shifty Schiff, Letitia. We're awaiting charges, perhaps any moment for someone like John Bolton, I mean, the list goes on and on. Possible investigations into George Soros related group, Reid Hoffman, a billionaire Democratic donor.
David Frum, but this one, this one is history making. This is the first director of the FBI indicted on criminal charges in American history. DAVID FRUM, STAFF WRITER, THE ATLANTIC: I think we all need to mark
this day, September 25th. It's a major milestone on Americas transition from a fully free to a less free country. And I think that what you just remarked about George Soros is so important because, look, I think the tendency of some of the excellent reporting that we've heard over the past 20 minutes has been to offer viewers a little bit of comfort.
Maybe the case will be dismissed as a selective prosecution. Maybe the jury will refuse to convict. But the president has here an agenda that is bigger than mere retribution, as reprehensible and un-American and contemptible and vile and undemocratic and fill in the words as that is.
After the shooting of Charlie Kirk, that heinous crime, the president went on national television and he said what he wants to do next, and that is attack the fundraising of the Democratic Party by using the prosecution mechanism. This is not just a backward-looking prosecution against the presidents past enemies. This is a declaration that the president and his -- one of his most important aides, Stephen Miller, has made this point, also explicitly intends to act in the future to use the prosecution mechanism to pervert the 2026 elections, break up Democratic Party fundraising.
That's why you go after Reid Hoffman, that's why you go after the Soros family. They're important Democratic donors, stop them, intimidate. And maybe even if you don't stop them, intimidate them, frighten them, warn them that there could be a prosecution in your future if you give money to my opponents.
[19:25:03]
So, President Trump is playing for all the marbles here and the various forms of consolation that we have. Maybe that Pam Bondi feels a little bad about her actions here. Pam Bondi should have walked out the building. And she's already disgraced herself by the fact that she's on the job tonight is a disgrace, and an indication of who she is and what she is.
But more is coming if the president can have his way and the 2026 elections are in grave danger, and this is one of the mechanisms, along with deploying police on the streets of cities to make sure that the elections are not free and not fair, so that Trump has a chance.
BURNETT: Rebecca, do you agree? Thursday, September 25th, 2025, a day in history because of this Comey indictment.
REBECCA ROIPHE, FORMER PROSECUTOR, NY DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE: I do, and I think one of the most important things to note right now is the difference between what happened under the Biden administration and what happened here. So, under the Biden administration, he followed the procedures. He appointed a special counsel. He said himself that he would have nothing to do with any of the decisions having to do with prosecution, and that traditional independence that prosecutors enjoy is fundamental for our liberty. And we're seeing now why, and it's because otherwise we have political actors going after individuals.
And as Robert Jackson, the former attorney general and Supreme Court justice, said, the greatest danger and the greatest power of prosecutor has is to go after disfavored individuals rather than after the facts and after criminal conduct. And that's what we're seeing here. It's fairly clear, I agree, and its egregious. And it is an erosion of the institutions that we have that protect liberty in this country.
BURNETT: All please stay with me.
I just want to bring in now, Democratic Congressman Eric Swalwell, because he sits on the House Judiciary Committee.
And, Congressman, what's your initial reaction now that we actually have confirmed that James Comey has been indicted on two charges?
REP. ERIC SWALWELL (D-CA): It's an awful day for what's supposed to be a free country. This is a mad king picking off each of his political enemies. And I have to say, as a member of the Judiciary Committee, we're not helpless.
And it's a -- it's really a time to ask ourselves, and congress, will we shrink or will we stand up to him? And it's a time for your viewers to ask themselves, do they care? Do they understand that if Donald Trump has not come after you today, that he will come after you if you ever dissent against him?
And so, for me, I'm just more motivated than ever to win the midterms, to have accountability, to use the power of subpoena and to make it clear that all of this is going to come out, bar licenses are going to be at risk if people abused a bar license. And you don't need me because you've heard from other legal experts. But if you brought forward a case that you knew you could not prove beyond a reasonable doubt, that will put your bar license in jeopardy?
BURNETT: Well, yes. And our reporting does indicate she had concerns about the case itself, although not with her ability to get an indictment. Obviously, we understand the bar for an indictment is much lower than the bar for actual conviction.
Congressman, we did just get a post finally --
(CROSSTALK)
SWALWELL: The prosecutor standard and I just want to make it clear is --
BURNETT: Yes.
SWALWELL: -- you don't prosecute because you think you can get an indictment. When you bring an indictment, you have to believe ethically that you can prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt.
BURNETT: I'm glad you said that. And I want to context that, if I may, Congressman, just by saying that we are aware that there were there have been documents prepared in the Eastern District of Virginia by people who have been working on this, indicating that they did not think that this was a case that could be proven. They had that that would have only been presented to Lindsey Halligan, who's now in charge of that office on Sunday when she got the job. So here we are. Obviously, this was filed right away, nonetheless.
The president has just posted, Congressman, and I want to read it to you because we just got this. He posted on his own social media site, all caps: Justice in America, exclamation point. One of the worst human beings this country has ever been exposed to is James Comey, the former corrupt head of the FBI. Today, he was indicted by a grand jury on two felony counts for various illegal and unlawful acts. He has been so bad for our country for so long and is now at the beginning of being held responsible for his crimes against our nation, capital N, all caps, make America great again.
Congressman?
SWALWELL: It's sick. It's sick. It's a mad king involving himself in something that no prior president has ever involved himself in, which is the independence of the Department of Justice. And it just comes down to do we care? Do we -- as Americans care that he's just going after his political enemies? I'm at the very top of Kash Patel's list of his enemies that he put in his book.
And I can tell you that the easy way to go would be to hide under the bed and avoid speaking out. But we will lose our country if our leaders, especially people in power, if they shrink, because if I was to shrink, and if others were to shrink, why wouldn't everyday ordinary Americans shrink?
[19:30:05]
Why -- why would they go to a town hall? Why would they go to the town square? Why would they participate?
And so, this is really a time for all of us strength through numbers to stand up.
BURNETT: You talk about the midterms. In that context, I want to ask you about something David Frum just said, because we've got this Comey indictment as were waiting, the actual documents, we anticipate a possible indictment within a day, as soon as a day for John Bolton, former adviser to the president and a political enemy of his and also, we've been reporting on investigations now into to institutions linked to George Soros and also to Reid Hoffman, another Democratic donor, billionaire.
In that context, what you said about the midterms, David Frum was talking about that, those sorts of suits against people like Soros and Hoffman might make there be less money available for Democrats in the midterms, might make donors afraid, might make people scared of prosecution. Are you concerned about that? Is that a real risk?
SWALWELL: It is a risk, Erin, but give me the problem that we have won the midterms and we have to deal with whether or not they accept the outcome, because right now, we have to first win. And I say that because I'm frustrated, frankly, that more Democratic governors are not stepping up and maxing out democracy in their own states because our midterm elections are very decentralized. They're state by state.
Gavin Newsom, for example. He's not talking about the existential threat to democracy. He's showing what we can do. We have Prop 50, which is on the ballot on November 4th, to match the seats that were taken in Texas.
So, show. Don't tell. What are you going to do to make it easier in your state for people to participate in democracy as Donald Trump is trying to make it harder everywhere?
So Democratic governors really need to step up, Erin, because we can lose everything. If we don't win the midterms in November of next year, we will not have a free and fair election in 2028. I promise you. And that needs to be clear to everyone.
BURNETT: So, Congressman, the statements that we're getting from the attorney general, Pam Bondi, herself, as well as from the director of the FBI, Kash Patel, they talk about no one being above the law. They talk about full accountability. They are the words that they are actually using. They talk about the FBI, the prior leadership, as corrupt.
So, when you hear them say, this is about accountability, this is about being. No one is above the law. This is about nobody can lie as they allege that the former FBI director did.
Does any of that find fertile ground? It will find fertile ground with some.
I'm sorry. We just -- we just lost the audio for the congressman. So, while we get -- while we are looking for that, I want to bring in Ryan Goodman.
Of course, here, Ryan, we are just getting the indictment. It is very short. I'm literally looking here on camera. I'm not in my reading glasses. Not going to be able to read it all in full. But they are talking about September 30th, 2020. The defendant, James Comey, willfully and knowingly making materially false, fictitious and fraudulent statement.
He's obviously -- this is referring to the exchange in Congress that we just played a few moments ago in his testimony. They say the statement was false, as James Comey then in there, knew he had authorized person three to serve as an anonymous source in news reports regarding an FBI investigation concerning person one, who obviously appears to be President Trump. But that person, the person, the leaker, of course, Mr. McCabe, Andrew McCabe.
And then they go on for the second charge and they talk about misleading comments. It's very short. This is it, very short indictment.
What do you make of the charges we have now that you can actually see the indictment? Count one, is this -- is this long. Count two is one sentence.
GOODMAN: So, pretty thin gruel. And count two just seems predicated on count one. And if this is about the back and forth between Senator Cruz and Mr. Comey, with reference to Mr. McCabe, then I think this case is basically dead in the water.
So, I do disagree with Ty Cobb about one thing. He said it's a he said versus he said case. It's not. What McCabe told the inspector general, according to the inspector general's report, is that McCabe authorized the leak, quote/unquote, leak or disclosure, then told Comey after the fact and that Comey kind of accepted it. And that is not reauthorizing the leak.
And so when Comey was asked by Senator Cruz, do you stand by your 2017 testimony, the 2017 testimony was Senator Grassley asking him, did you authorize this disclosure to the media? And he said, no.
That is consistent with McCabe's own testimony to the inspector general.
[19:35:01]
If that's the basis of this case, then I think there's every reason to suspect that the purpose behind it and what President Trump wanted is just the optics, the atmospherics to show that he has the strength of the ability to indict somebody and maybe even to make the point to indict them when there's no real case to bring. Because if that's what this case is about, it should sink.
BURNETT: Right. You're talking in the case of where McCabe would have essentially seeking forgiveness, not permission, by informing Comey after the fact, in which case, if that's the case, then neither individual lied as you lay it out here.
So, what happens here? I will note in the statements I've got the actual indictment here. But, Ryan, in the statement from the Department of Justice, from Attorney General Bondi and the FBI Director Patel, they do -- they note and then the statement from the Eastern District of Virginia, Lindsey Halligan she notes that the maximum sentence for this, if this actually goes to trial and Comey is convicted, would be five years in prison, up to five years in prison, they do note actual sentences in this case, is somewhat less.
But just to -- can you just explain the significance of something that we are talking about, accusing a former FBI director, something for the first time in American history that could result in a five-year prison sentence.
GOODMAN: It's extraordinary. And especially for this kind of a crime, which is making a -- knowingly making a false statement or lying to Congress, usually that kind of a crime is even brought only when a person submits it in writing, because then you know that its all premeditated. They've constructed exactly the way in which they want to make that false statement to Congress. And then they can be charged. Those are the cases that come to mind in recent history of any charges
ever being brought with this offense. So, the idea that they would bring this charge -- this charge against Mr. Comey for, you know, the penalty of potentially two charges each with five years in jail or in prison is unbelievably extraordinary.
So, I do think this is a milestone in the country's history that we're witnessing this altogether. As the use or what Ms. Bondi would herself say, the attorney general, the weaponization of the Justice Department, unless something else comes to light. I mean, based on everything that we know to date this seems like a clear abuse of the Justice Department and a complete violation of everything that's been done since the Nixon era.
I mean, since the Nixon era. All these institutions were reformed to prevent the White House from directing the Justice Department. And that seems to be undone tonight.
BURNETT: Well, Trump's celebratory post certainly would indicate that.
And again, from the indictment, as we have it, it appears very clear that they are referring to that testimony in Congress. They're not making any effort to indicate that there's anything else from the very, very brief indictment that we currently have.
All right, Ryan, stay with us. Everyone. Stay with us.
And of course, we'll continue to follow this breaking news. We're just going to take a very brief break.
Trump adversary, the former FBI Director James Comey indicted. The first time in American history that an FBI director has been indicted of a crime. And we are learning, we are confirming what Ryan just said, that a third count was presented to the grand jury, even with the incredible low bar of a grand jury indictment, the grand jury did not approve the third charge. We're going to have much more new reporting on that right after this.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[19:42:38]
BURNETT: We are back with our breaking news.
Jim Comey, former director of the FBI, indicted. First time in history an FBI director has been indicted for a crime. And we have new information coming in. And this is pretty significant on the charges.
Evan Perez is back with me.
Evan, looking at the indictment as we have it, I see count one and I see one sentence. Count two. That's it. Just two counts. And there's something really significant about that.
PEREZ: Right, exactly. And what -- what is significant in addition to those two, we know that there was a third count that prosecutors presented to the grand jury and that was voted down. There was not enough support from the grand jury to indict that third count, Erin.
And so, what we know went down is this, Lindsey -- Lindsey Halligan, who is the U.S. attorney who took office only on Monday was before judge magistrate judge, Lindsey Vaala. And that's where the indictment was returned late this evening.
And according to this -- according to our Eileen Graf, who was inside the courtroom there, it was Lindsey Halligan, as well as Maggie Cleary, who was briefly the U.S. attorney this weekend. She is now the first assistant, the first -- the deputy, essentially in that office. She was the only other person sitting in that office -- sitting in this courtroom that we can -- that we could recognize.
And that's significant, Erin, because what it seems to indicate is that essentially, the political appointees were the ones who were the ones who brought this case. Again, we don't -- we weren't inside the grand jury room. So, what this indicates is that, you know, there were the career lawyers essentially didn't want to be associated with it. Again, that's one of the things that was a big concern of this case before this happened.
And so, we know that these two counts that were -- that were -- that were brought, one of them has to do with making a false statement to a U.S. senator who asked whether Comey had ever authorized someone at the FBI to be an anonymous source in news reports. Comey responded that he had not. He had previously said that he had not. And he stood by that testimony.
And this was about an investigation related to the person identified here is only person one, which we know to be Donald Trump.
BURNETT: Yeah.
[19:45:00]
PEREZ: And the statement, according to the Justice Department, according to this indictment, was false. And so that's the basis on which these two counts are based, right? This was a count of making a false statement. And the second count of obstructing this congressional hearing. And so that's the gist of what these two charges are now, again --
BURNETT: Do we know, Evan, what the third count was that they failed to get approval from the grand jury for?
PEREZ: Yes. It was another count of making a false statement. It appears that the -- that prosecutors wanted to charge him with making another false statement during his testimony. What that is, it's not exactly clear at this moment. We're still trying to -- we're still trying to narrow that down.
But as you remember, Erin, we've shown some of the video of some of that testimony. There were multiple questions from Ted Cruz, from Lindsey Graham, from Chuck Grassley, and based on what we can read here right now, the one charge has to do with whether he was ever a source to news organizations for someone to be an anonymous source to a news organization for, related to an investigation on Donald Trump.
That is what prosecutors were able to get a charge approved on by the grand jury today.
PEREZ: Right. And of course -- all right, so one other thing. And I want to get everyone's reaction to what you just said, because I think one thing, everything you said there is important.
But what you said about the fact that the political appointees were the one in the room that were able to CNN was able to ascertain who they were. Lindsey Halligan and Maggie Cleary, and that none of the career prosecutors who, by the way, were the ones responsible for doing all the work on this because Lindsey Halligan not only has never prosecuted a case before, but came on the job on Monday, were not in the room. And that obviously is hugely significant.
Before I just get the panel reaction to that, I want to ask you one other thing. In this moment, historical moment where you've got the first time of ever criminally charging an FBI director, what happens after an indictment in a case like. This is a criminal case with a sentence of up to five years if convicted. So, then what happens to James Comey right now?
PEREZ: Well, he will. Okay, in normal times and the caveat here being we don't live in normal times, but in normal times, what you would have is a defendant like this who doesn't have a criminal history, doesn't pose a flight risk. You would make arrangements with his lawyer to turn himself in.
And so that could happen as soon as tomorrow. But again, we don't live in normal times, right? And so, we still don't know yet how that -- how that dance is going to play out in the next in the next day, perhaps. Normally what you would do is bring him in to be presented to the court tomorrow, right?
I will note that James Comey, if you remember, he was investigated for that social media post where he posted a picture of shells that appeared to show 80, 86. Yeah, right. 8647. You'll remember that the Secret Service went to pick him up to do an interview, right?
And they wanted, you know, the administration, I believe, wanted the imagery of that of him getting picked up by the secret service. They could easily have just had him show up somewhere to be interviewed. They could have talked to him on the phone. You know, they wanted that imagery.
So, if that's what they want tomorrow, that's what they could have. Again, tomorrow, we will see whether how he presents in court and how the administration wants to carry this out.
BURNETT: All right, Evan, thank you very much. And please stay with us. I know you know, you're getting calls here right now breaking more on this.
The Democratic senator, Richard Blumenthal joins me now on the Judiciary Committee.
Senator, you're hearing Evan's latest reporting. I know you've had a chance to read the very brief indictment such that it is. Your reaction, sir.
SEN. RICHARD BLUMENTHAL (D-CT): My reaction is it is a sad, dark, really scary day for America. Donald Trump directly singled out James Comey, a critic and political adversary, for charges that seem to be unfounded. Remember, a career prosecutor resigned rather than bring them, and only because Donald Trump appointed his personal lawyer to be the U.S. attorney are these charges going forward.
And I think we all ought to be frightened today, because if Donald Trump can populate the Department of Justice with federal prosecutors throughout the country, nobody is safe. If some U.S. attorney in Topeka wants to go after a local businessman or a public official, this indictment says you can do retribution. Vengeance and vanity are the reasons for these charges.
And the posts that have been put up by the president, Attorney General Bondi, the director of the FBI, could well create a defense because they boast of this indictment.
[19:50:10]
They literally talk about Comey in terms of an ultimate finding of guilt. And if they don't create a defense, they could even result in dismissal by a judge who wants to preserve the rule of law.
BURNETT: Senator, what happens now? I was a moment ago talking to your colleague Eric Swalwell, congressman from California in the House Judiciary Committee, and he was saying that Congress needs to stand up. And I want to ask you in this context, what can you do right now as a Democratic senator about this?
BLUMENTHAL: I can ask questions of the Department of Justice, which we will do. We can support colleagues and others on the Republican side who may be inclined. I hope they will be to draw a line here and protest.
Obviously, I have no role in court. I was a prosecutor for four and a half years as U.S. attorney in Connecticut. I also was attorney general for 20 years. The most consequential decisions I made were whether to charge someone because nobody ever fully recovers from those charges. A lot of people believe that an acquittal just means there was some technical issue.
So, I think it's important to encourage the private bar to step up. Donald Trump made deals with a number of the major law firms in the country. They ought to rip them apart and say enough is enough. I would encourage attorneys in the department of justice to stand up for their conviction, and conscience as Erik Siebert did. He's the U.S. attorney who resigned rather than bring those charges.
And as -- as a member of the United States Senate, I'm going to go to the floor of the senate. I'm going to go to committee meetings. I'm going to speak privately. I'm going to protest, and I am going to seek legislation.
We're formulating right now that may well prevent some of this perversion of justice. We are writing legislation that will give remedies and rights to people who are victims of malicious prosecution. We have to provide safeguards because we clearly seen how the ordinary norms are defied by this autocratic president. We're on the way to tyranny if we permit it to go forward.
BURNETT: Senator Richard Blumenthal, thank you very much. I appreciate your time.
And we do have more breaking news. Weve got new details coming in about this indictment. Also new details, as we said, about only the two political appointees, according to CNN's reporter in the room, being in the room, none of the career prosecutors who would ordinarily be there apparently were there, more significant details breaking here. And well be back with those in just a moment.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[19:55:38]
BURNETT: Back with the breaking news of the former FBI Director James Comey's indictment.
Everyone's back with me now.
Rebecca, let me just start with you. The latest reporting, Evan Perez, saying from CNN's reporter in the room that the grand jury did not approve a third count against Comey for an additional false statement. So, can you just contextualize that so we can all understand when you go to a grand jury, how low is the bar? What is the significance of a grand jury returning yes on two and no on the third?
ROIPHE: Right. I mean, grand juries are known to return indictments on very little. The standard is probable cause, which is very low. It's the same standard. It is for arresting somebody. And so, the fact that they didn't return this is very, very important.
And I would say also the fact that those prosecutors were not in the room, they understand that their client is not Donald Trump, that their client is the American public. And that is very, very significant because the political appointees have been acting and in fact, saying that their client is President Trump, which is absolutely incorrect.
BURNETT: Xochitl, what's your reaction to the second point that Rebecca just mentioned, also from Evan's reporting, right, is that the two people in the room were Lindsey Halligan who's been on the job for -- it's Thursday, so Monday, this is would be her fourth day, and Maggie Cleary, both political appointees, and that the people who would have done the work and had the analysis of this, the career team was not there. Evan said very much could be interpreted as a refusal to be there.
What does that say to you, given your tenure at the DOJ? HINOJOSA: That's right. It's unprecedented for career officials to be
involved, especially in something like this. An indictment like this. Whenever you bring charges, it's because of a career official. It goes up and there is a recommendation that's made to the U.S. attorney.
I'll also point out that it was only Lindsey Halligan who signed the indictment, and there wasn't any AUSA. There wasn't anyone else who signed that indictment. Which makes me think that, yes, there was sort of protest from the career professionals at the Justice Department.
I also just want to say, I've been getting text messages from former DOJ officials, career DOJ officials over the last hour, and everybody is in shock. It doesn't surprise them, though, because this is the way the justice department has been. Career officials have largely been either pushed out or silenced and are not in meetings about major decisions about cases.
And I think what sticks out to everybody, which I know you mentioned earlier in your show, is when pam Bondi said no one is above the law. That is standard DOJ speak. That is what we all believe in, in that building.
But the reality is, is that the actions over the last nine months are not the case. Donald Trump, Trump was charged on 44 counts. He is the sitting president of the United States. You have you have Eric Adams, whose case was withdrawn. You have now Tom Homan, which they have not charged. And they -- according to reporting, they've dropped that investigation. And now Donald Trump is going after his political enemies.
So, I think that right now, morale is low at the Justice Department. And I -- the Justice Department, I think is on its way to being broken, if not already. And I think you're going to see more career officials leave.
BURNETT: David Frum, it was only a few days ago when you and I were talking and you were talking and you said, do not lose your ability to be shocked. And I was just struck by something Xochitl just said there, right, that they were shocked even though they were not surprised by -- what we anticipated would happen here with Comey. It was it was your word, Xochitl, that caught my attention in light of what you said the other day, David Frum. And here we are just a few days later where people are shocked but not surprised.
FRUM: Right. And we need to keep in mind that it's not just a matter of career people having responsibilities. Senate confirmed Trump appointees have responsibilities. In the first term, some of Trump's appointees were people of integrity, were Americans. You had John Kelly. You had General Milley, you had Jeff Sessions. They behaved in American ways.
In this term, Trump has learned from the mistakes of the first term and said, that's it. I am getting no one with integrity in any Senate confirmed job, and there is going to have to be a lot if and when we ever get the right to vote, our feelings about what has happened today, there's going to need to be a lot of investigations, because it's not just the president who is to blame here. It is every Senate confirmed person who didn't quit the job today.
BURNETT: Quick final word, Ryan Goodman. Do you see Comey turn himself in tomorrow or do they go get him?
GOODMAN: I think they'll turn himself in. I think that's the best way for him to do it.
And just to piggyback on something, David just said, just a big picture. I think it's also -- to think about the U.S. Supreme Court. So, in terms of what happened in Trump's first term, "The New York Times" reported that Trump tried to order the indictment of Comey. But Don McGahn, his White House counsel, pushed back. And then the U.S. Supreme Court last year said he can order a sham investigation. And he'd be totally immune. I think that's partly why we're in the predicament that we're in.
BURNETT: And here we are now. Thank you all very, very much.
And thanks to all of you for joining us.
Anderson continues our breaking news coverage now.
