Mainstream Press Confesses They Missed the Other Politicized Prosecutions
In her reply memo arguing she is entitled to legislative immunity in conjunction with her oversight visit to Delaney Hall on May 9, which led to assault charges after ICE unlawfully arrested Ras Baraka, LaMonica McIver described the charges against her this way:
The indictment charges a sitting Member of Congress for conducting oversight of a controversial ICE facility and for continuing to undertake that oversight in the face of ICE obstruction that included deliberate delays, deception, an armed and masked response team of over a dozen agents, and the arrest of the Mayor of Newark in the middle of a crowd of civilians on a baseless trespassing charge.
This reply was, admittedly, submitted after the indictment of Jim Comey on Trump™ed up charges. Indeed, McIver even cited the Comey situation in her vindictive prosecution reply.
The government’s efforts to explain statements of the President and Justice Department officials fare no better. The President’s declaration that the “days of woke are over” in connection with this prosecution is evidence that the charges are based on party and ideology and are part of a broader partisan agenda of ending “wokeness.” The statement is consistent with the President’s actions just last weekend when—concerned that “delay” in prosecuting specific political rivals is “killing our reputation and credibility”—he pushed out a “Woke RINO” U.S. Attorney who was inhibiting retributive prosecutions.6 The President’s statements may be inconvenient for the prosecution, but they accurately reflect his intent that the Department of Justice implement his political will. And the officials at DOJ have heard that call.7
6 Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump), Truth Social (Sept. 20, 2025, at 18:44 ET), https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/115239044548033727; see also Alan Fuer et al., Trump Demands That Bondi Move ‘Now’ to Prosecute Foes, N.Y. Times (Sept. 20, 2025), https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/20/us/politics/trump-justice-department-us-attorneys.html. 7 Sadie Gurman & Lydia Wheeler, James Comey Indicted on False Statement Charges, Wall St. J. (Sept. 25, 2025), https://www.wsj.com/us-news/law/james-comey-indicted-on-false-statementcharges-2c896df2?st=gX4Tob&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink.
But here we are, four months after first Ras Baraka and then McIver were charged — and four years after Michael Sussmann was charged on a single false statement charge on the last day before the statute of limitations expired — and the mainstream press has only just now discovered that Donald Trump has weaponized DOJ against his adversaries.
Really?
I’ve already used past politicized investigations to describe where things are headed (note, too, the report that a flunky with a DWI conviction ordered six US Attorney offices to investigate the Open Society Fund).
But I want to point to something else from McIver’s prosecution.
Four months after she was charged, DOJ still hasn’t provided her basic discovery.
Over a month ago, DOJ agreed to give McIver video of the tour she took of Delaney Hall after the alleged assault. But it has instead stalled on editing the video.
First, the government asserts that some of the Congresswoman’s requests are “moot because the Government has agreed to provide her with what she seeks.” Opp. 69. In particular, the government has agreed to produce the video recordings from inside Delaney Hall that related to the Congresswoman’s tour of that facility on May 9. ECF No. 19-15 (Cortes Decl. Ex. M). But it is now more than six weeks since the government made that promise, and the defense has not received that material.
The government offers no real excuse: it merely claims that “ICE is currently reviewing the footage . . . to excise hours of video during the relevant timeframe which does not capture the Congressional tour.” Opp. 70. Yet the government provides no explanation why that process has taken so long. In fact, the Congresswoman and her colleagues were inside the facility from approximately 2:48 p.m., after Mayor Baraka was arrested, until 3:47 p.m., when the Members left Delaney Hall; surely agents are capable of reviewing those recordings from that one-hour timespan and sorting out the portions capturing the visit.
Nor does the government explain the necessity to “excise” scenes that do not relate to the Congresswoman’s tour. Certainly, the government identifies no privilege or security issue that would warrant or require such a process. Indeed, because the Congresswoman is a Member of the House of Representatives, as well as a member of that chamber’s Homeland Security Committee, there is no conceivable reason to keep her from seeing all of that footage.1 The Court should order its production immediately.
The government agreed to name the ICE officers involved in the event, but it has not even submitted a protective order it demands before it’ll do so.
The government also promised in its August 11 letter to produce the identities and ranks of any officers and agents present “at the time of the arrest of Mayor Baraka,” as well as identify which of those individuals were equipped with a body worn camera (“BWC”). Cortes Decl. Ex. M. To be sure, the letter also conditioned the information’s release on the parties’ execution of a protective order. Six weeks later, however, there is still no draft. The government merely promises that “this should be accomplished by the end of September,” with no explanation for the delay. Opp. 72.2 The Court should order the government to provide Congresswoman McIver with a proposed protective order immediately. And the Court should also order the government to prepare the production in the meantime.
DOJ claims it has turned over all the bodycam footage, but there’s at least one guy from whom McIver got no footage (and possibly a second), nor a confession that he simply didn’t turn the bodycam on.
McIver has requested the communications the officers sent during and about the event. But thus far, it appears DOJ has not collected them to find out if there is anything exculpatory in them.
First, although the officers have been “directed” to preserve that material, it is unclear who actually gave that direction or how they communicated it. Nor is there any information about the scope of the preservation. For example, were the officers instructed to retain all of their communications, whether on personal or government-issued devices? Were they told that they had to preserve all transmissions on every medium and application, including those on which messages disappear such as Signal, Telegram, and WhatsApp? Were they informed that the scope was to include any electronic or written communications with anyone, regardless of the recipients’ or senders’ relationship to the government?
[snip]
Finally, and most concerning, it is quite clear from the government’s formulation that the government has not actually collected, much less reviewed, those communications themselves. Without having done so, the prosecution team has not fulfilled its Brady obligations and cannot credibly represent otherwise to the Court or defense. That is because they do not know what is contained in the communications.
As I’ve noted, Todd Blanche is personally implicated in the competing claims of assault here. He’s the one who ordered Ricky Patel to arrest Ras Baraka in the first place.
V-1 announced a decision to arrest Mayor Baraka: “I am arresting the mayor . . . even though he stepped out, I am going to put him in cuffs . . . per the Deputy Attorney General of the United States.”
These are the kinds of allegations that right wingers claim, without merit, went on in the January 6 case: missing video, missing communications, and personal involvement of a political appointee. And the delay in production suggests there might be something bigger going on.
And yet you won’t hear that from the vast majority of the mainstream press.
Can’t believe I need to have sympathy for that POS Comey.
I have no sympathy for that doofus Comey. I think I heard the champagne corks popping over at Hilary’s and Martha’s houses at the news. The pearl clutching on MSNBC yesterday was performative, should be back to regularly scheduled broadcasting soon. Play the clips from Seinfeld where Jerry says ‘That’s a shame’. Maybe he can get another book out of the ordeal.
Whatever your feelings about Comey, a prosecution as nakedly political as this one ought to concern everyone.
I agree. This is serious stuff.
yep
Agree. If we shrug at malicious prosecutions of people we don’t like, we’re doing some of Trump’s work for him: tacitly agreeing that such prosecutions can *ever* be acceptable.
I agree. How WE feel about Comey is beside the point. Trump’s hatred is why the prosecution is unconstitutional.
I also imagined that reaction from Martha Stewart and Hillary.
If Comey had just done his job and shut down the election interference coming from those Hillary-hating agents in the NYC FBI office he could have put a stop to this. Instead he let them go on making unauthorized leaks to the media, Rudy G and James Kallstrom as well as ginning up an investigation of the Clinton Foundation based on the “evidence” in the book “Clinton Cash” which was written by Peter Schweizer, Steve Bannon’s henchman. Those agents then started smearing McCabe to the media, claiming he was biased because his wife had taken $$ from donors to Hillary when his wife ran for the Va state senate — none of which was against the rules or the law. McCabe caved to their pressure and did their bidding by leaking the fact that the FBI was investigating the Clinton Foundation — but not the fact that the FBI was also investigating the Trump campaign’s ties to Russia. When McCabe got outed he claimed Comey had authorized that leak. Comey denied McCabe’s claim and the DOJ Inspector General’s investigation backed Comey up. McCabe was fired.
The IG report also made it clear that Cowardly Comey only made those two unauthorized statements about Hillary’s emails because he, like McCabe, was also being pressured by those NY agents and that he didn’t try to control despite him being their boss. He badly damaged Hillary and that October public statement made right before the election likely cost her the election.
Comey helped create this monster so I don’t feel sorry for him, as much as I disagree with this blatant political prosecution. I only wish the media would make it clear what the issues underlying this case really are and Comey’s role in letting it happen. But Comey is a media darling so they give him a pass.
That’s the whole point of ‘due process’. Do away with that and the legal system just becomes a way to hold onto power while getting rid of anybody who gets in the way.
Although it’s straining at the seams, the legal system’s not totally under Miller’s control yet although I can’t help wondering what they are planning to try and do under their upcoming government shutdown.
I think they will be happy to shut everything down (apart from the police and the military and the parts that allow them to siphon off as much money as they can while they can); they just need to find a way that they can pass it off on the ‘deranged far-left marxist radical terrorist antifa organistion’, aka the Democratic Party.’
Re: “straining at the seams” – I’ve been hearing consistently since September 2 that Hegseth was sending 600 lawyers to DoJ because they need more immigration judges (see AP and The Guardian, for starters). In the past couple of days, I saw one report saying 800, but I can’t come up with a reasonable source for it. Either way, that sounds like a strain to me.
Immigration courts aren’t Article III courts – they’re administrative courts.
If they need more immigration judges (something long-ago assessed), it cannot help that Trump’s DOJ is currently firing those already on the bench–at least here in Connecticut.
Of course, what they “need” is people who will rule in favor of the administration, defenestrating every immigrant (illegal or not) they can.
The guy I don’t like is getting wrongly taken to the wood shed by the government I don’t like, let’s celebrate, is some exceptionally unaware karma to put out in the universe. Definitely has a mid-1930’s Germany, good thing it’s not us this time vibe!
Perhaps, I am missing something. While the Comey situation may be a egregious example of a selective prosecution, selective prosecutions happen all the time. The Durham prosecutions are two examples, if Hunter Biden was named Hunter Smith would those cases been brought to trial. I remember a guy named Ken Starr. Lawyers here likely can call up many other examples. I guess I don’t happen to believe that Lady Justice is blind.
The mirror image of the Comey prosecution is the way that Jeffrey Epstein was treated in 2007 by Alex Acosta and the DOJ. Think of all the Wall Street bankers rotting in prison for crashing the economy in 2008. How were the Bushies treated for lying about WMD? Thanks Obama for looking forward and not backward.
What we see in the mainstream is every mainstream entity, especially the video media, covering the exact same thing as every other mainstream entity and repeating 90% of what they say. In other worlds most news reports are reports about news reports. No information is transmitted.
An example is the Fed and Trump and Powell. About which, we are told, is interest rates. Well interest rates are a monumental subject. Containing the entire monetary system; the banking and financial system. Saying Trump wants “lower rates” contains no information.
Since you bring up interest rates, as I’ve written previously PA is in a budget stalemate.
So interestingly, the PA Treasurer who will be running against current Governor Shapiro, announced “We have no greater responsibility than to invest in our children and most vulnerable populations” and so is offering “low interest rate” loans to PA’s Head Start providers and county governments through a short-term, investment loan effort designed to ease the financial burden being faced by these entities, which serve Pennsylvania’s most vulnerable populations, due to the lack of an enacted state budget.
Those low interest rates are at 4.5% that taxpayers will now have to shell out or program cuts by the counties, etc. to cover the “low interest”.
I guess she never heard of zero rate loans.
https://www.patreasury.gov/newsroom/archive/2025/09-24-Short-Term-Funding.html
This is my main objection to social media’s place in society: the press simply regurgitates whatever is coming up through their feed, and “Voila!” they’re done, as if that is in any way “news”.
Additionally, there should be a law against, among other things, EO by Xitter, and there’s too many politicians on both sides that equate social following with a voting constituency. It’s not, and it’s in fact an invitation for foreign influence.
But we knew that?
Re: repeating 90 percent – yeah, stenography will give you that … I see BARELY enough actual reporting in Classic Media to give me a faint hope until the same outlet dashes it the next day.
Thank ($DEITY) for independent journalists, and independent journalism.
Durham led a political witch hunt to prosecute both the prosecutors of the “Russia Hoax” and various players. Despite lasting twice as long as the Mueller Investigation, there was but a single plea on a single charge of doctoring an email. Moreover, Biden’s AG, Milquetoast Merrill, declined to fire Durham because he didn’t want to be “political.”
Milquetoast Merrill?
1) You got the name wrong.
2) You got the reason wrong.
3) You seem to adhere to conspiracy theories.
Please don’t come to my site and act this dumb.
I see this gratuitous exhuming of the Merrick Garland horse and cerimonial buggy whip beating everywhere. Its the dissapointed liberal version of the Republican “Daddy’s home” meme. Garland didn’t save us! Liberals who “do their own reasearch” on the criminal justice system. Magical thinking isn’t a conservative-only disease.
A lot of them seem to think he should have indicted people on Jan 21, even though he wasn’t AG until March.
You could also argue that Garland (and Lisa Monaco) chose to let John Durham go on tilting at his nonsensical windmills because they perceived (correctly) that his quest was doomed to failure. Fail it did, ignominiously, with two juries refusing to convict in the cases Durham *personally* brought. Thus he was forced to come up with his (equally nonsensical, but who cares anymore?) “Clinton Plan,” in which he essentially charges a losing candidate with the crime of opposition research.
I thought of Durham’s prosecutions last night. But also of the strafing Trump One did at Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, Michael Cohen, and anyone else they could intimidate with threats of legal jeopardy. (In Cohen’s case, those threats were the other side of an extortion coin. When Cohen refused, he paid dearly–more than most J6 rioters.)
None of this is new. Maybe the coverage treating it as “unprecedented” is simply seizing on a moment in which Trump seems newly weakened–his naked authoritarianism more visible and unpopular, his attempts to blame the shutdown on Democrats suddenly visible as the lies they always have been.
If Garland had fired Durham, we’d never have heard the end of the “what were they hiding?” conspiracy theories from the RWNJs.
But maybe its a problem that we care enough what the RWNJ’s say to act accordingly
The problem was in how Garland supervised Durham, via a guy he believed was above reproach but who happens to be a guy involved in Andy McCabe’s unlawful firing.
I’ve got a ton of criticism for him on ALL Special Counsels, including Jack Smith. But it wasn’t that he was milquetoast.
Great points! Not enough credence is given to the notion that rank incompetence and stupidity will defeat them in the end.
The issue is what happens between now and the end.
Yeah, in the MSNBC – NBC separation forced by Ellison merger & acquisitions, MSNBC news show transcripts have all vaporized, and it got stuck with that hack Ken Dilanian FT, while losing the much harder working hot shit DOJ reporter Julia Ainsley, to say the least.
And what all was happening elsewhere at the ICE facility in Jersey on “those hours of video during the relevant timeframe which does not capture the Congressional tour,” might be a damn sight relevant.
Yep.
For example, they might have other phone calls to Blanche or Noem.
Yes! If not MacIver’s atty, perhaps someone else can -or did- order preservation properly, & could get it collected?
Probably not ranking chair, or the right Cmte, but Jersey: Mikie Sherrill on the Armed Services Cmte says she has top clearance. She’s running for governor and her unredacted military records were apparently just leaked. I’m guessing that effects her clearance, at least temporarily.
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/release-mikie-sherrills-military-records-democrats-push-investigation-rcna233893
I didn’t know Ainsley was gone. That’s a damn shame.
It is worth noting that MSNBC now draws on the reporting of Carol Leonnig, late of WaPo. While Leonnig has had her missteps (like all reporters), she still boasts major access and superior ability to break stories. Leonnig will look around corners that Dilanian ignores. Maybe her influence will up his game.
Hmm. Maybe.
Yes, Ainsley I checked, also Kornacki, going with NBC, sounds like probably Richard Engels & Trymaine Lee too. Everyone whose names we don’t know (& institutional knowledge).
Jacob Soboroff is to have Chuck Todd’s old political news boss job; that’s one improvement, but a lot about this shift off sounds like trouble. All the double entendres around naming the holding company, for one.
Check out the in-text link for details in their earlier article about it too
https://cordcuttersnews.com/msnbc-nbc-are-breaking-up-and-going-their-own-ways/
I think the strategy behind most of this is to provide an on-brand fig leaf for non-enforcement where they don’t want enforcement; bankrupting the political opposition and burning funds for functions at departments and agencies that they don’t want functioning.
There were two counts on the indictment. First has to do with whether Comey was “taught” that Person 1 approved a plan concerning Person 2. 12 or more jurors did not concur. Which leads me to wonder how many jurors they DID get to concur on the one count they got a true bill on. Maybe got a ham sandwich, but no lettuce or cheese on it, and on crap bread.
Also Patrick Fitzgerald (special counsel for Scooter Libby and Blagojevich prosecutor) probably knows something about misuse of executive powers and the difference between starting with a crime and indicting the person vs starting with the person and looking in the couch cushions for a crime. (I read the lawfare article too).
I thought the grand jury returned two true bills (indictments) out of three attempted charges.
Where did you find the specific term “taught” being used? Given what I understood to be the fact pattern (based on the Lawfare piece), these charges would involve Comey and McCabe and their discussions about the leak ex post facto. If Halligan used the word “taught” in order to charge a crime, that would involve some serious misleading of the jurors.
Also, wouldn’t that make Comey Person 3? (Which to me makes no sense.)
Person 3 is whoever Comey allegedly lied to Congress about authorizing to leak (so either McCabe or Dan Richman; the indictment is so skimpy with facts that it could be either). One of the obvious signs of the slapdash nature of this indictment is that the indictment that was approved refers to “Person 1” and “Person 3,” but not “Person 2” – because “Person 2” (Trump) was mentioned in the false-statements charge that the grand jury didn’t approve, which came first in the original three-count indictment. A self-respecting DoJ attorney would have cleaned up the references in the final indictment – but then, a self-respecting DoJ attorney wouldn’t have tried to bring this mess before a GJ in the first place.
There’s got to be an easier way to surrender your law license than working for this misadministration and signing your name to this dreck.
The charge charged is McCabe.
The one not charged is Richman–he was recently subpoenaed and presumably told the GJ that he wasn’t a cut-through.
14 voted out the other two charges.
14 out of 23. So just a tad more than 60%. Not a good prospect for something requiring a unanimous jury.
Are we assuming it was the same 14 on each of the two true bills?
I can’t stop wondering what tools of persuasion, up to and including misrepresentation of the evidence and/or law, Halligan used to convince those 14 to indict. I desperately hope that we will somehow find out. I’m especially interested in how the concept of materiality got sold to those 14 grand jurors.
Just finished Katherine Stewart’s Money Lies and God, a masterfully detailed overview of the intersection of moneyed interests and culture warfare. Stewart shows exactly how the wealthy froth up the frothy right in order to pursue their own oligarchic agenda. It’s worked beautifully for them since Trump came on scene, and the costs have been borne by women, LBGTQ folks, POC, and the poor, just as they intended–because they are themselves insulated against the damage, and the profits it has generated have been enormous.
Lindsey Halligan is one more mediocre beneficiary of this system. She uses it and It uses her until her usefulness expires, as nearly always happens. Her sloppiness has exposed her for what she is, and it only the hand of Lord God Trump keeping her afloat now.
This does have that feel of an oppressor trying to wear down challengers. I found that to be true in my own personal experience. So, I’m grateful LaMonica McIver and Marcy have the energy, fortitude and strong commitment to democracy to push this forward. McIver’s attorneys seem very competent and thorough. In a weird way, this seems like a possible opportunity in the sense that it could be a rallying point for others.
It really is frustrating and disappointing that so much of the media has let us down so badly. Upon reflection, that may be why I reacted so strongly to the word “rescission” yesterday. Had the media not failed so miserably, we might have had a much better handle on what is happening. One of the most distressing things is how so many in the media cannot see their own capitulation to oppression. And even worse, some of them may just not care.
When Trump or one of his toadies accuse the “radical Leftists” of “violence” or “terrorism” I have never heard any reporter ASK FOR AN EXAMPLE!
Sorry, this is OT, but has anyone?
“Many people tell me.” Q.E.D.
But not big strong men with tears in their eyes …
One thing this president is obsessed with in mass media manipulation.
People often mistake that the first impeachment was about him wanting the Ukrainian president to charge Hunter Biden. He just wanted a press conference announcing it.
It’s the main Fox Noise headline and even the mainstream press is headlining as ex-FBI director indicted rather than the corruption. I get the legal arguments, but this seems like way more about the banner headline and keeping chattering class busy than any real legal argument.
[Welcome to emptywheel. Please choose and use a unique username with a minimum of 8 letters. We adopted this minimum standard to support community security. Because your username is too short and common, your username will be temporarily changed to match the date/time of your first known comment until you have a new compliant username. /~Rayne]
Speaking of the Sussmann case, that indictment is an interesting comparison to the Comey indictment. Durham took 27 pages to lay out the case against Sussmann for a single charge of making a false statement to the FBI. Halligan couldn’t be bothered with so much as a single supporting paragraph of explanation for either of the two charges she scraped past the GJ.
Given the long list of recent catastrophic failures in every court except SCOTUS, I imagine she’s been told to provide as absolutely little as legally permitted. Less rope to hang, less articles to be written about their incompetence before the inevitable dismissal.
One wonders if some of those law firms that capitulated will be asked for some pro bono effort to assist Halligan in prosecuting Comey.
Pro Bono Trumpico.
I’m no fan of Comey, but no one should be popping champagne corks about his indictment. I seriously doubt Hillary, who knows something about the rule of law, is doing so.
This absolutely is consistent with other prosecutions, including McIver. However, at the same time, it does take things to another level. Who ever thought we would see the felony prosecution of a former FBI director for alleged false statements to Congress? And on this flimsy a basis too (which, of course, is why so many AUSAs declined to pursue it)?
I’ve said it before: there is no bottom with the current administration, and no limit to the malice. People should know this by now, but if this is what finally makes them come around, then maybe some good can come out of it.
Who ever thought we would see criminal prosecutions of a former and future president for alleged…?
Trumped-up charges™
I love it. : )
The local TV station boycott of ABC’s Jimmy Kimmel Live! appears to be ending.
Sinclair said that it would end its preemption of the late night show Friday night after “thoughtful feedback from viewers, advertisers, and community leaders representing a wide range of perspectives.”
…no editorial or content concessions were made by Disney.
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/tv/articles/jimmy-kimmel-returning-sinclair-stations-180358404.html
I heard that part of the reason for their reversal is that they have affiliate stations in Portland and Seattle and got a lot of complaints from that portion of their media territorial holdings…
I suspect a lot of people in red states watch Kimmel, too.
i daresay “POS” Comey has come to understand viscerally the ramifications of his actions way back then.
i can’t say i feel sorry for him. Ambition/power is a bitch.
Would it be worth it if he came to jesus and made a mea culpa U-turn? Undoubtedly there are beans he could spill.
even the die hards at Felon, Inc know that OrangeTurdOne has indisputably stepped on the third rail.
it’s not hard for the woefully complicit media to now acknowledge that Don the Con has irredeemably shat on his DOJ
From my experience as a video editor – it would literally take no more than 15 minutes to identify the start time and end time, scan through the footage to those times, place a marker on both times, create a copy of the time in between in another file, save it to a thumb drive. BTW – I use Adobe Premiere Pro and After Effects. It is done all the time when you want to fix one portion and you need a client to take a quick look at what you’ve changed and not have to watch a longer video.