Return to Transcripts main page
The Source with Kaitlan Collins
Federal Grand Jury Indicts Former FBI Director Comey For False Statements, Obstruction In Congressional Testimony; Comey Responds To Indictment: "I'm Innocent. So Let's Have A Trial"; Trump Calls Soros A Likely Candidate For Investigation. Aired 9-10p ET
Aired September 25, 2025 - 21:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[21:00:00]
ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST, ANDERSON COOPER 360: --if all goes as expected, former FBI Director, James Comey, will surrender to federal authorities, tomorrow morning.
After years of loudly critical public statements by the President, just days after a presidential tweet, calling for Comey's prosecution, he was indicted tonight, as you know, on two charges, most notably, of giving false statements to Congress.
CNN's Kaitlan Collins has more now, on how Comey's surrender will play out, and what could come next. She continues our coverage with "THE SOURCE." I'll see you, tomorrow night.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE (voice-over): This is CNN Breaking News.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, CNN HOST, THE SOURCE WITH KAITLAN COLLINS: And we are following major breaking news tonight, as former FBI Director, James Comey, is now the first senior government official to face charges, in one of President Trump's biggest grievances, the 2016 Russia investigation.
Comey is charged with giving a false statement and obstruction of a congressional proceeding, relating to the testimony he gave before the Senate Judiciary Committee, five years ago.
This indictment comes just days after the President publicly demanded it, and shortly after the person the President had picked to be the U.S. Attorney in this office quit, and the new U.S. Attorney, three days into that job, did what the President had wanted to happen only five days before the statute of limitations was set to run out.
Tonight, the President is celebrating, writing in all-caps, on Truth Social, quote, "JUSTICE IN AMERICA! 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." The President ended his post with, MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN.
This comes as I'm told by sources tonight that James Comey is expected to surrender, tomorrow morning. We'll be watching, obviously, that appearance very closely.
But the former Director of the FBI has already made quite clear tonight that he's prepared to fight these charges.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JAMES COMEY, FORMER FBI DIRECTOR: My family and I have known for years that there are costs to standing up to Donald Trump, but we couldn't imagine ourselves living any other way. We will not live on our knees, and you shouldn't either.
Somebody that I love dearly recently said that fear is the tool of a tyrant, and she's right. But I'm not afraid, and I hope you're not either. I hope instead, you are engaged, you are paying attention, and you will vote like your beloved country depends upon it, which it does.
My heart is broken for the Department of Justice, but I have great confidence in the federal judicial system. And I'm innocent. So let's have a trial, and keep the faith.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Comey's saying he's prepared for this to go to trial. We'll see if that happens.
And of course, this comes after the President had made no secret of his plan to try to make this day happen, when he was running for reelection. So much so that I actually asked former Director James Comey about this, more than a year ago, and whether or not he thought this day would ever come.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Do you believe that Donald Trump will come after you personally, if he's reelected?
COMEY: Maybe. I mean, he spent four years coming after me. I think all I ended up with was a $400 tax refund, which is great. I guess I overpaid my taxes.
I don't worry about me. I have the resources, and the friends. And I know how things work. I can defend myself. I really worry about the people, who have less of that than I do. The people making the cases, the career civil servants, who are prosecutors and judges, who are the bedrock of our rule of law, they are the people who will be most at threat.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: I want to get straight to CNN's Senior Justice Correspondent, Evan Perez, who's following this closely. Evan, obviously, we've seen this indictment now. It's just about two pages. It's quite brief, actually. As you combed through it, what stood out to you?
EVAN PEREZ, CNN SENIOR JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Yes, no, the bare bones nature of this -- of this charge, of these -- of this indictment, really stands out.
And what we know about it, Kaitlan, is that Lindsey Halligan, who is the newly-installed U.S. Attorney in the Eastern District of Virginia, she is the one who personally presented this to the grand jury. That's not normal. Usually, you have career U.S. Attorney -- Assistant U.S. Attorneys who make these presentations to the grand jury.
In this case, we know that there were concerns that were raised by the career lawyers in that office, who did not believe that this was a case that they could -- that they could bring to fruition.
[21:05:00]
And so, what we have here is a two counts against the former FBI director, an extraordinary day in American history, of course. But we also know that there was a third count that prosecutors had tried to get approval for, that the grand jury rejected.
We know that what was rejected, according to the magistrate judge, was a count of false statements in the jurisdiction of a congressional proceeding, and obstruction of a congressional proceeding. And so, those two carry five-year terms, if he is convicted. Of course, we're a long way from there.
And we know that Comey, as he says in his -- in his video statement there, is planning to fight this. We also have a statement from his personal lawyer, Pat Fitzgerald, who says, Jim Comey denies the charges filed today in their entirety. We look forward to vindicating him in the courtroom.
And so, that process begins tomorrow in earnest. As your reporting indicates, he's going to be surrendering in the federal court there, in Alexandria, and then we'll see how this case fares before a judge and before, eventually, perhaps a jury.
COLLINS: Yes, and so since he's expected to surrender tomorrow, I just think for everyone watching, there are some people complaining, on the right, that he's not being arrested, that agents aren't showing up at his house to arrest him--
PEREZ: Yes.
COLLINS: --as a result of this.
What is tomorrow going to look like? What are you going to be watching for as the next steps happen here, over what was so clearly telegraphed by the President himself here?
PEREZ: Yes, look, I mean, your reporting, which indicates that he's going to be allowed to surrender, is actually a very big deal, because, as you pointed out, people on the right, they want him picked up, like Roger Stone was and other people were.
And look, what usually happens in these cases, in normal cases, is that someone who like him is not a flight risk, is not believed to have any plans to flee, is given the opportunity to surrender themselves. And so, that is being handled in the normal course that it is. They've been in touch with his lawyers, and they know what is going to happen. Now, we expect that he's going to be released on his own recognizance, and then this trial will begin, this case will begin in earnest.
Here's the thing. The fact that the President of the United States has made so crystal clear what he wants in this case has done some damage. And the briefs from Pat Fitzgerald, and the lawyers, kind of write themselves, right? Because the President has made clear that he was ordering this prosecution.
And we know, from our own reporting, and what's out there, that prosecutors in the -- in the office had some concerns. We also know that Lindsey Halligan, who was just brought there in the office, was the one who had to personally present this case to the grand jury. So, all of that stuff will come rushing back as part of the story, as part of the case, as this goes forward.
COLLINS: Yes. Evan Perez, as you learn more, obviously throughout the hour, we'll check back in with you and our team.
PEREZ: Thanks.
COLLINS: Thank you for that reporting.
PEREZ: Sure.
COLLINS: My legal sources are here tonight. We've got Elliot Williams, Judge Jill Konviser, and Elie Honig, three of the best voices on this.
And Elliot Williams, I want to start with you.
Because, I just want to read some reporting from my colleague, Katelyn Polantz, who says that a court record has made public what the grand jury voted no on, what Evan was just referencing there in terms of a potential third charge here, and it was on another alleged false statement to Congress.
As Katelyn notes in her reporting here, she says that's a very unusual occurrence in the justice sys -- in the federal court system. And this is not part of the indictment, but according to the record, it pinpoints Comey's answer, when he was asked about an alleged plan from Hillary Clinton, during the 2016 campaign.
He had testified to Lindsey Graham, back in 2020, given this was five years ago, people probably don't recall this, that that didn't ring any bells with him. Graham had told him about this alleged plan, about distracting from her use of an email server. It is something that obviously conservatives have talked about at length. And I wonder what you make of the fact that they -- the grand jury said yes, on two of these charges, but no, on that third charge there?
ELLIOT WILLIAMS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: Right. It's a notable occurrence anytime the grand jury does not reject a charge. Now, it's certainly not a rubberstamp for the work of prosecutors. But for the most part, when prosecutors go to the grand jury, they come back with charges.
Now, what it appears, you know that -- I think the logical conclusion to draw from it is that the grand jury simply did not believe there was probable cause to find that that the offense was committed.
Now, there might have been evidence to suggest that Jim Comey had knowledge there. But really, what needed to be established was that he knew his statement was false, and still made it anyway. That is the big wrinkle here, and is going to apply across all the other charges in this case.
[21:10:00]
Not simply that there was a statement that people didn't like or that was ambiguous or had some gray area, but that he knew he was making a falsehood, a material falsehood, and still went ahead and made it anyway. Those can sometimes be hard to prove, and I would assume that the grand jury just assumed they didn't have it here.
COLLINS: Well, Elie Honig, what's your take on that, given -- as Katelyn Polantz, who knows this, the justice system well, and the federal court system well, she says it's unusual.
Just how unusual is it?
ELIE HONIG, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST, FORMER ASST. U.S. ATTORNEY, SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NY: Yes, it's pretty hard to lose even one count in a grand jury, Kaitlan, and that shows me that prosecutors already have overextended, and have already been called out to an extent, by the grand jury rejecting that one count.
Now, stepping back to the actual indictment. When Donald Trump put up his social media post, over the weekend, it was a line that was crossed. We had a President directly ordering DOJ to indict one of his political opponents.
Then we saw other indicators that there might be problems with this indictment, the fact that it went nearly to the end of the five year statute of limitations, on an area that's been looked at exhaustively and nobody has seen fit to charge it, the fact that the sitting U.S. Attorney, who Donald Trump put in place, an experienced prosecutor, had problems with the case, the reported fact that Todd Blanche had problems with this case? I was willing to give it -- keep an open mind, and give it the benefit of the doubt.
And when this indictment came out? This thing is decrepit. This thing is, I don't think going to reach a jury. And if it does, I think they're going to reject it. It all comes down to this allegation that Jim Comey lied when he said that he had not authorized a leak. And it -- what this does is it pits Jim Comey's word, on the one hand, against Andy McCabe's word. On the other hand, the government is going to have to prove that Andy McCabe is telling the truth beyond a reasonable doubt. This isn't just that he said, he said. They're going to have to carry their burden beyond a reasonable doubt.
And I also want to add, it's possible that neither of them was lying, because this is going to get in the weeds for a minute, but I'm going to show you why this indictment is going to fail.
Jim Comey said, I did not authorize the leak. Andy McCabe said, I authorized the leak and told Jim Comey about it the day after. Those could both be true. In other words, Jim Comey could have said, I didn't authorize the leak in advance. If he learns about it after? That's not necessarily authorizing it. So, it's possible that neither of them is lying.
This indictment is indecipherable. It's a mess. I'd be shocked if it gets to a jury, and if a jury ends up convicting beyond a reasonable doubt.
COLLINS: And Elie, that's a really crucial point, because essentially, you're saying that, could it be a, ask for forgiveness instead of permission, situation. But what you're talking about there, and where Andrew McCabe, who was Comey's deputy at the time, revealed that was in an Inspector General investigation, an independent watchdog investigation, that was done under the Trump administration--
HONIG: Yes.
COLLINS: --when Trump was in office the last time.
HONIG: Exactly, in 2018.
And again, it is quite possible, if you're the boss of an organization, and somebody comes to you and says, Hey boss, I authorized the leak after the fact, right? So, someone comes to you and says, Hey boss, yesterday I authorized the leak. Would you consider that to be you, as the boss, authorizing it? I wouldn't. I would say, Well, I didn't authorize that. So they could both be telling the truth here.
And yes, this whole incident has been studied in depth. There's a long report from the OIG, the Inspector General of the Justice Department in 2018. John Durham, who was desperate to indict anybody in his special counsel investigation, looked at this and did not return indictments. There's a reason that everybody has passed on this up till now.
COLLINS: And that was John Durham who was put in that position, by Bill Barr, Trump's Attorney General. And so, obviously that has raised so many questions here.
Judge, I have to get your take. Because, as Elie described it as decrepit, I'm sure the Justice Department might take issue with that.
But when you look at the indictment, it's two pages. Count one not only charges Comey with making a false statement, but this is the language, for people who haven't read it. It says, he willfully and knowingly made a materially false, fictitious and fraudulent statement.
Some people might see that and say, That reads like a Truth Social post.
Is that typical language in an indictment to you?
JILL KONVISER, FORMER NEW YORK SUPREME COURT JUDGE, FORMER NY STATE INSPECTOR GENERAL, ADJUNCT LAW PROFESSOR, FORDHAM, AND CARDOZO SCHOOLS OF LAW, FORMER ASSISTANT DISTRICT ATTORNEY: It is. It can be typical.
They generally track the language of the statute, federal statute, and then try to put in bare bones, when -- they don't have to put more than they have to put in, and they did that here. And they are referring with that language to whether or not McCabe -- McCabe was told to be an anonymous source about this information. So, I don't think the indictment itself tells us all that much.
What will tell us, or what, at least, what a judge will hear -- a judge is going to review the grand jury minutes. They will review the process. They will review the evidence before the grand jury. They will read and see what the evidence was, what the witnesses said, to determine whether or not that with which was presented to the grand jury was appropriate.
There's an expression, you can indict a ham sandwich. And it's true. There's almost no occasion, where a prosecutor goes in where a case doesn't end up with a true bill. It does happen, but it's rare.
[21:15:00]
The fact that one or two counts were tossed out here doesn't tell me all that much. What tells me more is that this case is 5-years-old. It has been looked at every which way, and that it took a threatening Truth Social post, by the President, to get a brand-new U.S. Attorney with no experience, to go in and present this case.
So, a judge is going to look at this, with the microscope they should, and make a determination whether what was presented to the grand jury was appropriate, to reach what is a very low standard before the grand jury. We'll see. We'll see what happens.
COLLINS: Yes, and Elliot, the judge mentions what the President posted over the weekend. I think there's some confusion over this. Yes, he posted it. He did delete it, but then he reposted it with more added on, essentially.
But I also want everyone to listen to what President Trump said in his own words, this weekend, about the case.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: I just want people to act. They have to act, and we want to act fast.
You know, they were ruthless and vicious. I was impeached twice. I was indicted five times. It turned out to be a fake deal.
And we have to act fast, one way or the other, one way or the other, they're guilty, they're not guilty, we have to act fast. If they're not guilty, that's fine. If they are guilty, or if they should be charged, they should be charged, and we have to do it now.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Elliot, the view from people that I've spoken with is, Well, look how many times Trump was prosecuted and people charged him, like either -- either he'll be guilty or he won't be. I wonder what you make of that mindset--
WILLIAMS: Yes.
COLLINS: --that a lot of Trump's allies have tonight.
WILLIAMS: Perfectly fine to have that view.
The President there, however, just put on a clinic for how to get a case tossed out for being a malicious or selective prosecution. He brought in a number of factors that have nothing to do with the four corners of the case.
Number one, going after Jim Comey's character.
Number two, talking about the speed with which he hopes that prosecutors act.
Number three, directing the Attorney General, in effect, in a statement, to bring a case.
All of these -- all of those factors suggest some level of leaning on the Attorney General, to bring the matter.
Now, to be clear, most defendants come forward with selective prosecution claims and don't win, because they don't have evidence, like we just saw from the President here. This is remarkable, this level of what -- I don't know what the verb to use is, but suggestion to the Attorney General of the United States to bring a prosecution. You really don't see that.
Also, talking about the speed with which he hopes that they act. There was one quote in your reporting earlier, Kaitlan, that we just -- you know, prosecutors should just bring the best that they have, and just get it to the grand jury, and let the court sort it out. Well, that's not the standard for bringing a case.
So he's really, every time he opens his mouth about the case, he's really jeopardizing his own prosecutor's chance of succeeding in the prosecution that he seems to want to happen. COLLINS: Yes, so it was notable today to hear what he said Saturday, and then hear what he said today, where he was much more cautious in the Oval, saying, It's not up to me, it's up to Todd Blanche and Lindsey Halligan. Not naming Pam Bondi.
Elliot. Elie. And Judge. it's great to have all of you here. Thank you for bringing us your expertise on this.
And we're staying on top of tonight's breaking news. And I'm going to speak next with someone who is a former attorney for President Trump themselves, and their view of the indictment of Director Comey.
[21:20:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COLLINS: Before the news broke tonight, of James Comey's indictment, the President was asked in the Oval Office today about the possibility of it happening.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: I can't tell you what's going to happen, because I don't know. You have very professional people, headed up by the Attorney General, and Todd, Todd Blanche, and Lindsey Halligan, who's very smart, good lawyer, very good lawyer. They're going to make a determination. I'm not making that determine-- I think I'd be allowed to get involved if I want, but I don't really choose to do so.
I can only say that Comey is a bad person, he's a sick person. I think he's a sick guy, actually. He did terrible things at the FBI and -- but I don't know. I have no idea what's going to happen.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: It stood out to me that he mentioned the Deputy Attorney General, and the new acting U.S. Attorney in this position there. He did not mention the Attorney General, Pam Bondi.
But later, we saw her in the Oval Office, with the President, both the President and the Attorney General, when they declined to weigh in, when they were asked by a reporter.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REPORTER: There could be an indictment on James Comey. Do you know if there is an indictment? Or Madam Attorney General--
TRUMP: I don't know. I know it's going on, because I read the papers just like you do, right? So, I don't know.
Do you have anything to say about that?
PAM BONDI, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL: We can't comment on that.
(END VIDEO CLIP) COLLINS: Pam Bondi said there, she could not comment.
I do want to bring in someone for a comment tonight. The former Justice Department prosecutor, who also previously represented President Trump in his classified documents case. Jim Trusty is here.
And Jim, obviously, you were a former prosecutor, for a long time, in the Department of Justice. Do you believe this decision to charge James Comey was reached independently of what the President has so clearly conveyed he wanted to happen here?
[21:25:00]
JIM TRUSTY, FORMER TRUMP ATTORNEY IN CLASSIFIED DOCUMENTS CASE: Well, probably. I mean, you do have a grand jury that indicted. They carefully considered the case. They actually shaved it down to an area that makes a lot of sense. Nobody's actually talking about the specifics of his false statement. But this was a Director of the FBI, who had a special employee designed for one purpose. To leak things to The New York Times.
Now, when he was pressed in Congress, on whether or not he had leaked something, he had authorized the leak of a memo he retained wrongfully at his house, he said, No, that's not my recollection. They challenged him about McCabe, another guy who had referrals to the Inspector General for lying. And Comey said, That's not my recollection.
So, in a weird way, through all this chaos, through all this kind of political interest of what's going on behind closed doors, who knew what? At the end of the day, the indictment that's left is actually pretty simple. He either lied about leaking to The New York Times in a tantrum because he was getting fired, or he didn't. And I don't think it's going to lend itself to the easy dismissals that some of your other folks have been saying they're going to get.
COLLINS: I believe it was -- it was Wall Street Journal.
But here's the reason that everyone's raised this question, is basically Ted Cruz had questioned him at this hearing, five years ago, and said, You're saying one thing, your deputy is saying another, in term of -- in terms of what you authorized to be leaked to the media and leaked to reporters. And he was saying his recollection was right.
And then Andy McCabe testified to an Inspector General, that basically he told Comey after the fact that he had -- he had released that information to a reporter. And so, I think that is really the question here, in terms of, of that.
But also just the overtly, you know, the overt pressure campaign coming out of the White House. I mean, do you not think that that is in itself unusual here?
TRUSTY: Well, I think there's a lot that's unusual. I don't envy Lindsey Halligan being put into the storm, but I don't really think that Lindsey is the one that's necessarily making all the decisions here. We don't know what's happening behind closed doors at the U.S. Attorney's Office. We don't know how long the Deputy A.G. and A.G. have been on this matter, deciding whether or not they think it's a case.
And let me just tell you. There's different things. Selective prosecution and vindictive prosecution are two separate things. But at the end of the day, if you're able to point to an Inspector General report and say, Hey, look, here's the Inspector General specifically saying, Comey set a dangerous example for 35,000 FBI employees, because he wrongly leaked information to The New York Times that he shouldn't have even possessed? That's their finding in that investigation.
And so, if you have witnesses that are locked in, if you've talked to the special employee, maybe you've even talked to The New York Times. I mean, there may be ways of proving this case quite nicely at Comey expense.
And before we relegate him to Patrick Henry's (ph) status--
COLLINS: Yes, I mean--
TRUSTY: --for being such a patriotic hero, let's remember his little seashell shenanigans, where a former Director of the FBI makes fun of killing the President.
COLLINS: Well, and you could say that that was wrong, and you thought it was in bad taste. That doesn't mean he should be indicted, right?
TRUSTY: Well, he wasn't indicted for the seashells. He was indicted for lying to Congress as a--
COLLINS: Right, but you brought it up.
TRUSTY: --as a chief law enforcement officer.
COLLINS: Can I ask you, because something you just said stood out to me.
TRUSTY: No, I'm just saying, let's not -- let's not pretend he's a saint, at this point.
COLLINS: I don't think anyone is.
TRUSTY: So go ahead.
COLLINS: Obviously people who -- Hillary Clinton voters would not say that.
But you just mentioned Lindsey Halligan. Obviously, you and Lindsey Halligan both represented Trump, on his personal defense team, outside of the White House. What do you mean that you don't think that this was necessarily her decision?
TRUSTY: Well, look, this is not something where she's going to come in and say, I don't want to hear from others. I mean, odds are that for a high-profile case like this, the Attorney General, the Deputy Attorney General, and perhaps many people around them, including some senior people from Eastern District of Virginia, have been talking about this case for a while.
Yes, there was four years of silence when Garland was the A.G., and there was not a snowball's chance in hell of Comey facing trouble. But in terms of the last six months, there's probably been a lot of robust conversation about the good, the bad and the ugly of indicting James Comey.
So, I'm not really prepared to assume that this was just this imperial moment of Lindsey Halligan announcing from on high, she's going to indict it no matter what the evidence is. I think there's probably a lot of authors of this indictment, besides the person that signs it, which is typical.
COLLINS: Do you think -- do you think you would have brought this case?
TRUSTY: Well, I don't know enough about it.
I mean, look, what I can tell you is the Inspector General report from August of 2019 -- and, by the way, have to give the date, because Comey had like five negative Inspector General reports, for abusing his position and violating DOJ policy, including what he did with Hillary Clinton.
I mean, the common denominator for everything that gets him in trouble is hubris. He writes books. He finds seashells. He announces that there's a tyrant in the White House. This guy thinks he's much taller than he is. And the bottom line is that brings -- that invites this type of problem.
But when I look at the Inspector General report, I think there's at least a valid basis for getting the indictment. How it plays out at trial, how it plays out--
COLLINS: Yes, but that--
TRUSTY: --in terms of pre-trial motions? I don't know yet. But we'll see.
[21:30:00]
COLLINS: I just think everything you mentioned there doesn't mean he lied to Congress, or that they'll be able to secure a conviction.
But I do want to ask, because in 2020, you warned that prosecutors should be dedicated to the truth, not looking for high-profile skins and acting out of political animus.
The President made very clear here that, that he wanted this to happen. I mean, he explicitly said it, over the weekend.
TRUSTY: I mean, are you -- look, can any of us be surprised that a guy who went through four years of insanely-weaponized DOJ, including Comey at the helm, would have some animus towards him? Of course, he has some animus towards him.
What I was actually heartened to see, and you played big chunks of the clips here--
COLLINS: Does that make it right?
TRUSTY: --is him kind of backing -- no, no, but let me just say, he also modified a lot of this to say, Hey, I've got people with DOJ making this decision. I just think Comey is a bad guy.
Look, from everything I've seen about Jim Comey, and from FBI agents that I talked to, and I'm talking about a lot of people that are former agents that are around for a long time, they realize that Comey did lasting damage to the FBI in his behavior. His ambush interviews of Flynn, his little jokes on the beach, his condescending and obnoxious behavior, even in a Hillary Clinton situation, right?
He, as a former Deputy Attorney General, had no business going out there and talking about that case at all. But this is a guy, who injects himself into the spotlight, because he thinks he's so important. So, at the end of the day, it's hard to shed a crocodile tear for him--
COLLINS: But again, that doesn't mean that he should be--
TRUSTY: --even if there's open questions--
COLLINS: Yes.
TRUSTY: --about the process.
COLLINS: I mean, the process is what matters here given, of course, the questions here. And obviously, Comey had been fired long before Trump was indicted.
But, I mean, it just raised questions in terms of what that means for the validity of the prosecution, given the guy who was in this U.S. Attorney's position resigned, because he didn't think the case was strong enough.
Jim Trusty, thank you, and we'll continue to check in with you as we follow this case.
TRUSTY: All right. Good to see you, Kaitlan.
COLLINS: We have new reporting next, on when James Comey is expected to be arraigned in federal court. Obviously, a moment to watch as he is vowing to fight these charges.
We're also going to hear from a key Democrat, on the Senate Judiciary Committee, his thoughts on this indictment.
[21:35:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COLLINS: We're back with our breaking news coverage tonight, as the former Director of the FBI, James Comey, has been indicted by a federal grand jury tonight, after President Trump had called, publicly, for his prosecution.
Court records show that he is expected to be arraigned in federal court, in Alexandria, on October 9th. We're obviously following closely to see, as these negotiations are shaking out, when he is going to appear, and where, as prosecutors are accusing Comey of authorizing a leak to the media, about an FBI investigation of Trump via an anonymous source. But that Comey later told the Senate, he had not done so.
This is Ted Cruz pressing Comey, on all of this, five years ago.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. TED CRUZ (R-TX): What Mr. McCabe is saying, and what you testified to this committee, cannot both be true. One or the other is false. Who is telling the truth?
COMEY: I just can only speak to my testimony. I stand by what -- the testimony you summarized that I gave in May of 2017.
CRUZ: So, your testimony is you've never authorized anyone to leak. And Mr. McCabe, if he says contrary, is not telling the truth, is that correct?
COMEY: Again, I'm not going to characterize Andy's testimony. But mine is the same today.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Joining me tonight is the Democratic senator, Chris Coons of Delaware, who's on the Senate Judiciary Committee.
And Senator, it's great to have you here tonight.
I just wonder what your reaction is to this indictment.
SEN. CHRIS COONS (D-DE): Well, Kaitlan, thanks for a chance to be on with you tonight.
What matters most to me, about where we are tonight, with this federal criminal indictment of the former FBI director, is how we got here.
It was just a few days ago that President Trump posted on Truth Social, a demand that Attorney General Bondi move ahead with prosecuting James Comey, claiming he's quote, Guilty as hell, unquote, and demanding action now.
When the serving U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, someone who had been nominated by President Trump and confirmed by the Senate, was fired and replaced by Lindsey Halligan, someone with no prosecutorial previous experience, and then she brought forward these charges to a federal grand jury, and got an indictment? That, to me, is a very chilling process that shows the President directly involved, in using the tools of the Department of Justice, to go after people that he has long-identified as a personal, political enemy.
There's others that he has also called to be investigated and prosecuted. And to the extent he's demonstrated now, that if you won't go along with it, he'll get you fired and get you replaced, even with someone who has no prosecutorial experience, is a chilling suggestion that will go back to the days before Watergate, before the 70s, where there's no barrier, no wall between the White House and the very powerful machinery of the U.S. Department of Justice.
[21:40:00]
COLLINS: Yes, the President's pressure is plain for everyone to see, in terms of what he has said and when. But given a grand jury brought this indictment, do you believe there's merit to these charges whatsoever?
COONS: Well, that's something that's going to be worked out in federal court.
But it's important to remember that the cost to Jim Comey, of defending himself is going to be significant. The risk to his reputation, to his family, the cost of posing a real defense, is also going to have a chilling effect on others, who are concerned about what might happen to them, their families, and their careers, if they were to face investigation and indictment, even if they're convinced they're innocent.
A lot of what President Trump has done now, for months, is to use the power of the presidency and the federal government, to go after people. It's long been said that a grand jury will indict a ham sandwich. An indictment is, in and of itself, not proof of guilt or innocence.
There are reports in the press that the career federal prosecutors, in the Eastern District of Virginia, would not sign off on this. But we don't know that for sure. And what's going to matter most is how the case is presented, and what a jury decides.
COLLINS: As a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, what questions do you have for the Attorney General, on this?
COONS: Well, Attorney General Bondi, when she came before us, for her confirmation hearing, said she wasn't interested in retribution, that she wasn't going to be leading the Department of Justice through the rear-view mirror, looking back at the challenges and the charges that President Trump faced. She instead was going to focus on protecting the American people, on fighting crime and on moving forward.
The interplay between President Trump, his demands for a prosecution of Jim Comey, and then these results suggest that she's not keeping the promises she made to us, on the Judiciary Committee.
COLLINS: When you see this, in terms of -- obviously, we'll see how this goes forward. There were questions about whether or not she was on board with moving forward with this. She posted tonight about accountability under the law.
I do think there are questions tonight, though, just about, the President often said that his success in office would be his retribution that he talked about on the campaign trail. Is that how you see this tonight?
COONS: That's certainly how it seems to me, Kaitlan, is that he is carrying through on his many, many threats, on the campaign trail, to wreak vengeance and to exact retribution against the folks he perceives as his political enemies.
Let's be clear. Jim Comey has his detractors among the Democratic Party too, folks who were big supporters of Hillary Clinton's, and there were things he did as FBI director that were controversial.
What I'm focusing on here is the process that got us here, the very public threats by President Trump, to his own Attorney General, to use the tools of the Department of Justice, to go after former FBI Director, Jim Comey, because he dislikes him, he thinks he's his political opponent, and someone who deserves to be prosecuted. In the United States, you shouldn't be able, as the President, to go after people individually, and use the power of the Department of Justice, in this way.
COLLINS: Senator Chris Coons, thank you for joining us tonight.
COONS: Thank you, Kaitlan.
COLLINS: Up next here for us. My White House insiders will talk about what led up to this extraordinary decision. And also, we'll speak with one of the reporters who was inside the Oval Office today, as President Trump was asked to weigh in on this.
[21:45:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COLLINS: President Trump is not hiding his celebration, about the indictment of James Comey tonight, an indictment that he had publicly pushed his Justice Department to pursue.
As a candidate, the President also made no secret of his desire to prosecute his political enemies, if he was reelected to a second term, something that CNN actually asked the President about, when we hosted our presidential debate.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: Well, I said my retribution is going to be success. We're going to make this country successful again, because right now it's a failing nation. My retribution's going to be success.
(END VIDEO CLIP) COLLINS: My White House insiders are here tonight. Jeff Mason of Reuters, and NOTUS' Jasmine Wright, both of whom were in the Oval Office, asking the President questions today.
And Jeff, I just wonder, based on what we were hearing from the President early on this and -- earlier on this indictment, and whether or not it was coming, we all kind of seemed to believe it was, and what he's saying now, what stands out to you?
JEFF MASON, WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, REUTERS: Well, it's, I mean, I'd like to ask more questions about what he knew ahead of time.
He was saying in both of the Q&As with reporters today, in the Oval Office, that he wasn't aware of what was going on with the indictment. But it's just important to follow that up with the fact that he very, very recently pressured Pam Bondi -- Attorney General Pam Bondi, to do this and to take on other enemies that he has.
I thought it was really interesting, the clip that you just played in terms of retribution. That is absolutely not been the guiding force, what he said, in terms of success, instead of going after his enemies, for the last several months that he's been in office. And tonight is Exhibit A or B or C or D or down to Z of that. I mean, this is a really significant move. And what's led to it has been his sense of grievance that has really powered a lot of the actions that he's taken and that he's encouraged his administration to take.
COLLINS: Jasmine, what sticks out to me is that when I have spoken with people, in the last 36 hours, about this, is that they're not even trying to focus on the Comey allegation, about him lying to Congress, or the obstruction about when it comes to leaking to reporters, when he was the director.
[21:50:00]
They've really just focused, to me, that, Well, Trump was prosecuted by people, and so now it's their turn to go through what he went through, the lawfare, and the legal fees, and dealing with all of this.
I wonder if that's what you've heard from your sources. Or what you've heard from them?
JASMINE WRIGHT, WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, NOTUS: Yes, I think that sense of fairness, retribution has been a huge component of what I've heard from my sources.
I think one interesting thing is that we know from talking to sources that were following the prosecution, earlier today, that that indictment came about around 5 o'clock. But that is when we were asking the President whether or not he believed an indictment were to come. That's actually when he actually prompted Pam Bondi.
And so, what you're hearing is definitely that sense of fairness from the White House, and from folks around the White House. I think really one interesting thing here, Kaitlan, is that President Trump seemed so trying to be really far removed from whether or not an indictment could come down. But obviously, he celebrated it just after that.
And so, I think that, yes, you're seeing a -- you're hearing a sense of fairness from sources, but also now a sense of celebration that justice has finally come, and that actually it's been brought by Pam Bondi.
COLLINS: And Jeff, the thing that you were getting at with the President today was, this doesn't appear to be the end of the road here. I mean, we've already been talking about potential charges against John Bolton. Today, he was signing that memo, directing the Justice Department and the FBI to investigate groups that they accuse of aiding political violence.
You had actually pushed him on that, Jeff. I want people to listen to what he said to you.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MASON: So that we can explain this in our stories, could you name a couple--
TRUMP: You have explained it right though, Jeff.
MASON: But--
(CROSSTALK)
TRUMP: Go ahead. Let's -- maybe let's give you another chance. Go ahead.
MASON: Antifa? Soros?
TRUMP: Yes.
MASON: What names are we talking about?
TRUMP: Well, Soros is a name certainly that I keep hearing. I don't know. But Soros is the name that I hear. I hear a lot of different names. I hear names of some pretty rich people that are radical-left people. Maybe I hear about a guy named Reid Hoffman, somebody, he's a pretty rich guy, I guess, and I hear about him.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Jeff, when you heard that, what did that say to you?
MASON: Well, I mean, just sort of a backstory on that question.
The President signed an executive order today, or a memo, or, I can't remember what -- an executive action of some kind, about political violence, and going after groups or left-wing groups that they feel are leading to that or generating it. And we just wanted some examples, in part, because, we're talking here about retribution, and yet they're also sort of framing this particular action as, This is good for the country, or This is trying to prevent violence from happening. And yet, the examples that they're giving are clearly thought out. And the President delivered, in some ways, on -- in an answer, because he listed some specific names.
I spoke to another administration -- a couple other administration officials, who are certainly convinced that this order, along with the rest of the work that they're doing, is meant to really crack down on a broader problem.
But it all sort of feeds back to that, that grievance that I was referring to earlier, which is sort of driving his activity in this, and in the Comey indictment--
COLLINS: Yes.
MASON: --and many more.
COLLINS: Jasmine, is that how you see it as well?
WRIGHT: Yes, I mean, I think we can take Pam Bondi's words as really bond here. She said, when I asked her about the report that Justice officials asked attorneys to look into that George Soros-backed group, she said, I can't comment on the specifics, but everything is on the table.
And I think that the White House and the Department of Justice really means that, when it comes to this idea of retribution, that they're going to kind of scour far and wide to, one, fulfill Donald Trump's pledge to bring retribution to his -- to his enemies, but also that they're going to try to do this in a way that potentially positively affects Republicans.
COLLINS: Yes.
Jasmine Wright. Jeff Mason. We'll follow this both closely. Obviously, not going away at the White House.
And of course, I should note that when it comes to the other people who are on the table here, we've heard from James Comey telling us that he was worried about this happening.
But he is not the only critic and political adversary that the President has targeted. Hillary Clinton, James Clapper, there are more, to name a few. We've actually spoken with so many of them about what they believe could happen. We'll talk about that, right after this.
[21:55:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COLLINS: We continue to follow the breaking news, as the indictment of President Trump's -- one of his most political, prominent foes, James Comey, has happened tonight. When I asked the former Director of the FBI, back in 2024, if he expected the President to go after him if he was reelected, he told me Maybe, but argued that he believed he'd be able to defend himself.
And we've also asked that question, given the President made his intentions quite clear, to his other political rivals.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Do you have concerns that they will attempt to prosecute you?
JAMES CLAPPER, FORMER DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE: Well, certainly I do.
COLLINS: So, what will you do if they come after you? What is your plan?
CLAPPER: Well, I'll lawyer up, I suppose. Already have.
COLLINS: Do you have personal concerns about him retaliating against you, if he does win this election?
HILLARY CLINTON, FORMER SECRETARY OF STATE: No, because I know I haven't done anything worthy of that.
But I will say that, going after people for partisan, personal, political purposes, is a very difficult experience for somebody. I know that, firsthand.
[22:00:00]
COLLINS: But just in the face of him saying that, that people like you, members of the January 6 investigative committee, belong in jail. And it's a pretty striking split-screen.
ADAM KINZINGER, (R) FORMER U.S. REPRESENTATIVE: You want to threaten to throw us in jail for that? It just shows how small of a person you really are.
I'm not intimidated. The person that intimidates me, the least of anybody in this country, is Donald Trump.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Those statements there, from several people who could be the point of the President's targeting. Of course, we will continue to follow that, and the James Comey case, very closely.
The news is going to continue with "CNN NEWSNIGHT WITH ABBY PHILLIP" up next.
