Return to Transcripts main page

The Situation Room

DOJ Vows to Appeal After Judge Tosses Comey and James Cases; U.S. Official Says Ukraine Has Agreed to a Peace Deal; FAA Expects Busiest Thanksgiving Travel Period. Aired 10:30-11a ET

Aired November 25, 2025 - 10:30   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

[10:30:00]

PAMELA BROWN, CNN ANCHOR: -- roadblock. Attorney General Pam Bondi is promising to fight a judge's decision to toss out the criminal cases against former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James.

WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: Both of them, of course, are longtime targets of President Trump's wrath and the cases against them were brought at his urging. Bondi says the judge won't have the final word. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PAM BONDI, ATTORNEY GENERAL: We'll be taking all available legal action, including an immediate appeal to hold Letitia James and James Comey accountable for their unlawful conduct. I'm going to keep going on this. I'm not -- you know, I'm not worried about someone who has been charged with a very serious crime. His alleged actions were a betrayal of public trust. So --

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: And both have denied the allegations against them. I want to bring in CNN Crime and Justice Correspondent Katelyn Polantz to help us better understand the judge's rebuke yesterday, which was pretty strong. And how the Justice Department will move forward from here with an appeal, especially given the statute of limitations on Comey.

KATELYN POLANTZ, CNN CRIME AND JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Yes, we still haven't seen the appeal notices come in on these cases. So, we're technically not in the realm of an appeal moving forward yet, although the Justice Department does promise us that they will be appealing this decision.

It's two-part. They are going to want to appeal on the part that says that the attorney general installing Lindsey Halligan as the interim U.S. attorney in the Eastern District of Virginia, the judge said that was invalid. They're going to want to say the attorney general has this authority, the defense of Lindsey Halligan, take it that way. The other part of this is you see the attorney general there saying that she wants to move forward with a case against Comey. Big question there, though, about if they can and how. The alleged false statements he was making to Congress that had been charged in two counts in this indictment that's now dismissed, those statements took place September 30, 2020. It's only five years for you to be able to charge a case in federal court like this. And this judge said that indictment Lindsey Halligan presented five days before the statute of limitations expired. It wasn't valid. And so, that's it. There's a footnote here where the judge addresses it.

However, the Justice Department is very likely going to try and make arguments that they want to correct an indictment or that the indictment should stand that this isn't -- that the judge got it wrong. We very much expect that. At the same time, though, this isn't going to end up being just about Comey's case. There's a question of Letitia James's case. Does the Justice Department try and charge that again? These were dismissed without prejudice, meaning the Justice Department could try again.

And then also, I am hearing there is chaos inside the U.S. Attorney's Office in Alexandria in the Eastern District of Virginia, with prosecutors not sure if they can move forward with filings, cases, new indictments, bringing grand juries and working with grand juries if Lindsey Halligan's name is on those documents, a judge has said she's not validly the U.S. Attorney.

BLITZER: How can they file more charges, new charges, against Comey if the statute of limitations has now come and gone, five-year statute of limitations?

POLANTZ: Yes. So, Wolf, there are some arguments out there that if there's a valid indictment, that something went wrong in the process of getting it, you have a time period afterwards where you can try again, like a six-month window. There is an argument that some could make that this is one of those things, that they will have the opportunity again with Comey. But Comey's team, in a statement, quite clearly said yesterday, there should be no further indictment. It's over.

BLITZER: All right. Katelyn, thank you very much.

BROWN: Thanks so much.

BLITZER: I want to talk right now a little bit of the legal analysis with Joey Jackson. Joey, so these cases were dismissed, quote, "without prejudice." What does that mean for Comey and Letitia James?

JOEY JACKSON, CNN LEGAL ANALYST, FORMER PROSECUTOR AND CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Yes, good to be with you, Wolf and Pamela. What it means is that they are not out of the woods yet. Had it been dismissed with prejudice, it means that it cannot come back. To the extent that it's without prejudice, the U.S. Attorney's Office can seek to refile. And yes, indeed, they can.

There are two options. I think the one is to refile the indictment. You heard Katelyn speak of it. The issue is, is the law says that if an indictment is dismissed on a variety of grounds, you have six months to file an indictment anew. With regard to the five-year statute of limitations, we do note, as it relates to Comey, they indicted five days prior. Now, Comey's people say, hey, that clock keeps ticking. There was no validly appointed U.S. Attorney. The government's position will be no, not at all, that it would have frozen at that time and we have six months to go.

The second option, as we note and as they seem to note, is to take the appeal to the Fourth Circuit, which is based in Virginia. That is the appellate court that could look to see if the district court got it wrong. Now, the way I view it, Wolf and Pamela, is that there's a number of issues. Remember that we've seen in New Jersey an opinion that was consistent with this opinion, and that is that you have 120 days to get Senate confirmation. You've got one shot at the apple.

[10:35:00]

And if you don't, then guess what, the district in that specific location gets to appoint the U.S. Attorney. You, executive, do not. We saw it happen in Nevada, same ruling, invalidly appoint the U.S. Attorney. We saw it happen in California. Why am I saying this? Because there's precedent. I know how oftentimes the politics are, oh, this was a lunatic judge who made a lunatic decision. Nonsense. There's precedent for it.

Last piece of this, Wolf, and that's this. When Samuel Alito was at the Department of Justice, he wrote a legal opinion indicating that exactly what this judge ruled, as it relates to the dismissal of the indictment on Comey and dismissal on Letitia James, is to the 120 days to get Senate confirmation, that's what it is. Now, this Justice Department takes a contrary view. But interesting, if it goes up to the Supreme Court, will he change his opinion on that or will he be consistent with what he said almost 40 years ago?

BLITZER: Interesting. If the attorney general, Pam Bondi, appoints a Senate confirmed U.S. attorney to review these files, could that person bring a more durable indictment against the New York attorney general, Letitia James?

JACKSON: Well, I think it's going to be heavily litigated. I think still what we have to remember in speaking about this is that this procedural technicality was decided on one specific ground, and that was as it related to a validly appointed U.S. attorney. There are still a number of other arguments, as we know, with respect to whether the indictments would be valid. Is this a vindictive prosecution? Was the prosecution brought about not because there were factual meritorious issues, but because they're enemies of the president? Does his social media feed really feed into that narrative? Was it properly presented to the grand jury? Did the entirety of the grand jury get to see and evaluate what her charges were and what Comey's charges were?

So, there's a number of what I'm saying, Wolf, is there's a number of other issues, not just the 120-day issue as to whether the indictments are valid. I don't think we get to the merits of any case until we address all of the underlying procedural issues. And that's the Department of Justice for years.

Historically, it's a department that's separate and apart from the president. The president, yes, is the chief executive, but they're independent. They really go after people without fear or favor. It's all about the legalities and the law, the facts, et cetera. Here, it just seems that there are indeed political motivations that can be argued stemming from evidence, the president's own tweets.

And so, I think there's a lot to be sifted through with regard to whether these indictments would be valid anyway, even if the department -- excuse me, even if the administration wins on an appeal, it goes back and then these other arguments will come at play.

BROWN: All right. I just have one quick question for you. You heard our Katelyn Polantz just reporting on all the chaos within the Eastern District of Virginia, right? What do you think the future holds for that office and for Lindsey Halligan?

JACKSON: I think -- you know what, Pamela, I think it's larger than that. I'm curious to see not only that office, but what it holds for the variety of U.S. attorney's offices throughout the country. These offices are about career prosecutors who are about their business. It's not about appointing someone who happened to be my attorney, who was an insurance attorney, who has no prosecutorial experience, et cetera.

And so, I think, ultimately, either you get a -- you get her Senate confirmed or you get somebody else in there who said it confirmed and you run an office like it should be and historically has been.

BROWN: All right. Joey, thank you so much. Great to see you.

JACKSON: Thanks so much.

BLITZER: Always good to have him with us here in the Situation Room. We're also following other breaking news this morning. A U.S. official now says Ukraine, Ukraine has agreed to a peace proposal to end the war with Russia, barring some minor details that still need to be discussed. We're going to speak to a key member of the Ukrainian parliament. That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:40:00]

BLITZER: Let's return to the breaking news we're following right now, just into our newsroom. The White House now says further talks are required between Ukraine, Russia and the United States as they try to work an agreement, reach an agreement to end the war. A U.S. official tells CNN that Ukraine, for its part, has agreed to a framework of a peace deal. But President Zelenskyy says there are still, quote, "minor details" that need to be sorted out.

BROWN: With us now is Halyna Yanchenko. She's been a member of Ukraine's parliament since 2019. So, have you been briefed on where things stand with this potential framework? What more can you tell us?

HALYNA YANCHENKO, MEMBER OF UKRAINIAN PARLIAMENT: Well, the negotiations are still taking place and there is a lot of discussion between so-called 28 points plan, which is obvious that it was drafted by Russia, in Russia, and then communicated to Ukraine through U.S., which, in my opinion, is a shame and it might lead to yet another diplomatic fault.

I am currently in Berlin and just today we were discussing with some German colleagues the previous attempts to actually finish the unprovoked war of aggression that Russia has started. We mentioned Minsk -- so-called Minsk agreements. We mentioned so-called Normandy's attempts. And the lesson learned is that all those previous formats, let's call them that way, have fault because of the single reason, because the conditions which were put in those previous negotiations were very pro-Russian.

[10:45:00]

And thus, the whole process was encouraging Russia to invest more money in defense industry and to come back to Ukraine with more tanks, more soldiers and more atrocities against civilians. Therefore, this is the lesson learned that we should move forward with.

The current negotiations should not encourage Russia to go further and conquer more lands, kill and murder more civilians in Ukraine or other European countries. But these negotiations should be fair. They should be pro-Ukrainian.

BLITZER: They should be, indeed. In the original U.S. proposal, Halyna, there was pressure on Kyiv to cede territory to Russia, including some territory that the Russians hadn't even conquered, also to limit the size of Ukraine's military and promise not to join NATO in exchange for an end to the war. These are all, as you well know and all of us know, very longstanding Kremlin demands.

From what you know about the agreement in its current form, are you confident that Ukraine's demands will be addressed as well, that these earlier provisions are gone?

YANCHENKO: I'm afraid that the point on basically giving away Ukrainian land might still be in this so-called plan, and I believe it's a shame because we are not talking about, you know, empty land, we are actually talking about settlements, about cities and villages with families living in their homes there.

After Bucha, after Irpin, the whole world has seen what Russia's occupation is doing to Ukrainian civilians. They're murdering people, they're torturing people, they're kidnapping kids and sending them to Russia, basically stealing them from their families. We don't want it -- we don't want this kind of atrocities to continue. And definitely, there is no discussion about giving away the cities and villages that Russia has not conquered, you know, voluntarily to Russia.

Once again, in order to stop this war and not just to make a pause, the conditions should be fair and conditions should be sustainable. By encouraging Russia, by giving them this, you know, kind of Christmas gifts as Ukrainian cities, as all their conditions, this type of negotiations will lead to nowhere. And also, I believe that it's not, you know, a right way to negotiate when stronger countries, leading countries like U.S., are trying to pressure democratic countries like Ukraine to basically surrender, because these 28 points plan is nothing but a force of democratic country to surrender to basically authoritarian regime, which Russia is.

BLITZER: Very quickly, Halyna, before I let you go, is there anything in this so-called agreement, this proposal that would require, that would force the Russians to return to Ukraine, the thousands of Ukrainian children who were kidnapped by the Russians and taken to Russia?

YANCHENKO: You know, actually, everything that Russia is putting in that plan, they can fulfill even now. They can cease fire immediately, basically, but they are not doing that. For example, just today, there was a huge attack on Kyiv and other civilian infrastructure. The target of those basically shelling was a pure civilian infrastructure, electricity. Kyiv is without electricity, which means no electricity, no heating in winter and no water.

And therefore, I believe that if Russia is really willing to negotiate, they should actually show it with their activities. They can return Ukrainian kids to their family right away. No one is, you know, no one is basically blocking this. And Ukrainian families are asking for their kids to be back. They can stop the shelling. They can return the people that they capture in their prisons, et cetera, et cetera.

BROWN: And just really quickly, I want to note that a State Department spokesperson had said, amid the scrutiny on this 28-point plan, that it was, quote, "authored by the United States with input from the Russians and Ukrainians." It sounds like you're saying that that's not exactly right, that Ukrainians didn't give input?

YANCHENKO: No.

BROWN: OK. All right.

YANCHENKO: No, this is pure Russian narratives.

BROWN: All right. Halyna, thank you so much for your time. We'll be right back.

[10:50:00]

BLITZER: Happening now, it's Thanksgiving Travel Tuesday. And the FAA is expecting the busiest season in 15 years. More than 52,000 flights are scheduled today. And AAA predicts more than 81 million people will travel at least 50 miles from home this Thanksgiving.

Let's go live right now to our aviation correspondent, Pete Muntean. He's over at Reagan National Airport just outside Washington. Pete, you're at the airport with the busiest runway in the country. How are things looking this morning?

[10:55:00]

PETE MUNTEAN, CNN AVIATION CORRESPONDENT: Wolf, I'm conscripting my league of handsome minions who keep coming through here. Every visitor, I just saw CNN's Haley Britzky to time the time it'll take her through TSA, the checkpoint here. That is the good news. Things have been moving pretty smoothly here. Five minutes is what the airport says to get through standard screening and TSA pre-check. And the volume seems to be picking up now that we're at the mid-day point.

Things moving OK, although not everywhere. The big concern always with Thanksgiving travel, the X factor, is the weather. And it's already been causing problems today. 52,000 flights anticipated to be handled by air traffic controllers in the U.S., according to the Federal Aviation Administration. There was a ground stop earlier at Houston George Bush Intercontinental Airport due to equipment outages. Then there were all the issues in Atlanta. And we're seeing the delays start to tick up here on the departures board.

The air traffic control tower had to be evacuated there for about 10 minutes, a condition called ATC zero, because of the fact that there was a huge storm system that really walloped the airport. There was a ground stop there for a time. We are not totally out of the woods yet, Wolf. And the FAA's warning of ground stops here at Reagan National Airport, also in the major New York airports, Newark, LaGuardia, and JFK.

The day is still young. We are not totally out of the woods yet, though. The cancellations are pretty low. Just checked FlightAware, only about 50 cancellations in the U.S. We'll see when Haley Britzky gets through the line how long it actually takes compared to the forecast from the airport. We'll see.

BLITZER: And I know your recommendation and my recommendation, if you're flying, sign up for TSA, pre-check, and even better, sign up for Clear.

MUNTEAN: Always.

BLITZER: You'll get through the security a lot quicker. Pete Muntean over at Reagan National Airport, thank you very, very much.

MUNTEAN: Anytime.

BLITZER: And tune in Thursday morning for our special Thanksgiving in America live coverage. It starts at 8:00 a.m. Eastern right here on CNN and on the CNN app. And we'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:00:00]