Halligan
(Photo
by
Al
Drago/Getty
Images)
On
Friday
afternoon,
cosplay
US
Attorney
Lindsey
Halligan
defended
her
A-plus
prosecuting
chops.
“There
are
no
missing
minutes,
contrary
to
the
suggestion
raised
by
the
court,”
she
huffed,
insisting
that
there
was
definitely
no
gap
in
the
record
of
her
presentation
to
the
grand
jury
that
indicted
Jim
Comey.
Halligan
was
so
indignant
that
she
docketed
three
filings
attesting
to
her
fitness
—
twice.
Or
perhaps
she
did
it
to
correct
this
embarrassing
typo
in
the
first
batch.
Simply
stated,
inability
to
proofread
is
the
least
of
the
problems
here.
Halligan’s
appointment
as
US
Attorney
for
the
Eastern
District
of
Virginia
was
almost
certainly
illegal.
And
even
if
Halligan
was
legally
appointed,
her
own
incompetence
and
missteps
might
well
doom
this
case
anyway.
Mind
the
gap
Initially
Halligan
tried
to
secure
a
three-count
indictment
charging
the
former
FBI
director
with:
1)
false
statements
under
questioning
by
Senator
Lindsey
Graham;
2)
false
statements
under
questioning
by
Senator
Ted
Cruz;
and
3)
obstruction
of
Congress.
The
jurors
rejected
the
first
charge,
but
indicted
on
the
second
and
third.
And
then
things
went
totally
sideways.
As
Empty
Wheel’s
Marcy
Wheeler
notes,
there
are
at
least
three
signed
versions
of
the
Comey
indictment.
The
first
contains
three
counts,
labeled
Count
1,
Count
2,
and
Count
2.
The
second
labels
them
as
Counts
1,
2,
and
3.
And
the
third
correctly
states
that
the
jury
returned
charges
on
just
two
counts.
Judge
Cameron
McGowan
Currie,
who
was
seconded
from
South
Carolina
to
hear
the
disqualification
motion,
signaled
that
something
went
awry
when
either
Halligan
or
her
first
assistant
Maggie
Cleary
was
negotiating
to
get
a
clean
“true
bill.”
After
first
ordering
the
government
to
produce
the
grand
jury
record
on
October
28,
the
judge
issued
a
second
order
calling
the
prior
production
incomplete
and
directing
Halligan
to
produce
everything,
including
“statements
made
prior
to
and
after
the
testimony
of
the
witness
and
during
the
presentation
of
the
three-count
and
subsequent
two-count
indictments.”
At
the
hearing
on
Thursday,
she
suggested
that
the
record
still
contained
a
139-minute
gap.
According
to
Politico,
“Currie
said
that
it
appeared
at
about
4:28
p.m.
on
the
day
the
indictment
was
returned
in
September,
there
was
no
court
reporter
in
the
room
to
transcribe
the
proceedings,
leaving
no
record
of
the
final
minutes
of
the
grand
jury’s
session.”
Many
observers
interpreted
this
as
indicating
that
Halligan
presented
the
case
without
a
court
reporter
present
—
an
almost
insane
level
of
incompetence
(or
malice).
The
DOJ
rushed
out
a
statement
denying
it,
and
on
Friday,
Halligan
docketed
a
declaration
insisting
that
“the
period
in
question
consisted
solely
of
the
grand
jury’s
private
deliberations,
during
which
no
prosecutor,
court
reporter,
or
other
person
may
be
present
pursuant
to
Rule
6(d)
of
the
Federal
Rules
of
Criminal
Procedure.”
She
says
she
concluded
her
presentment
at
4:28pm
and
then
wandered
off
to
do
very
serious
prosecutor
stuff
until:
Approximately
two
hours
later,
at
06:40
PM,
I
was
notified
by
then-First
Assistant
United
States
Attorney
Maggie
Cleary
that
the
grand
jury
had
returned
a
true
bill
as
to
the
presented
Count
Two
and
Count
Three
of
the
indictment
and
that
the
grand
jury
had
not
returned
a
true
bill
as
to
the
presented
Count
One.
I
then
proceeded
to
the
courtroom
for
the
return
of
the
indictment
in
front
of
the
magistrate
judge.
Good
to
know
that
she
took
the
court
reporter
in
there
for
her
case
in
chief!
And
yet
…
this
does
not
explain
how
she
came
to
have
three
signed
copies
of
the
same
indictment.
There
are
a
lot
of
ways
that
this
could
have
gone
down,
but
that’s
not
one
of
‘em.
Some
sort
of
way,
someone
went
back
to
the
jury
foreperson
and
got
another
signature.
Here’s
how
the
Washington
Post
said
it
happened:
[Halligan]
and
First
Assistant
U.S.
Attorney
Mary
M.
“Maggie”
Cleary
were
in
the
Alexandria
courtroom
when
the
indictment
was
delivered
to
U.S.
Magistrate
Judge
Lindsey
R.
Vaala
on
Thursday
evening.
[…]
The
grand
jury
foreperson
told
Vaala
that
the
panel
had
rejected
one
of
three
counts
in
the
originally
submitted
indictment.
Prosecutors
then
presented
a
revised
indictment,
the
foreperson
said,
containing
only
the
two
counts
that
the
grand
jury
had
agreed
on
and
with
which
Comey
was
eventually
charged.The
judge
received
both
indictments
Thursday
evening
and
noted
she
was
puzzled
by
the
outcome.“This
has
never
happened
before.
I’ve
been
handed
two
documents
…
with
a
discrepancy,”
Vaala
said.
“I’m
a
little
confused
why
I
was
handed
two
things
…
that
were
inconsistent.”Halligan
said
at
the
lectern
she
hadn’t
seen
the
first
indictment
that
was
rejected,
but
Vaala
noted
Halligan
appeared
to
have
signed
that
original
document.
[Emphasis
added.]
In
her
declaration,
Halligan
insists
that
“During
the
intermediary
time,
between
concluding
my
presentation
and
being
notified
of
the
grand
jury’s
return,
I
had
no
interaction
whatsoever
with
any
members
of
the
grand
jury.”
That
might
well
be
true.
And
it
might
also
be
true
that
“At
every
moment
I
was
in
front
of
the
grand
jury,
the
court
reporter
was
also
present.”
But
that
still
leaves
a
hole
in
the
record,
and
that
hole
has
other
implications
for
the
case.
Lipstick
on
a
pig
Judge
Currie
was
assigned
from
South
Carolina
to
hear
the
motion
to
dismiss
based
on
Halligan’s
unlawful
appointment
as
US
Attorney
for
the
Eastern
District
of
Virginia.
During
his
second
term,
Trump
has
largely
ignored
his
statutory
and
constitutional
obligation
to
get
Senate
approval
for
US
Attorneys.
Instead,
Bondi
does
a
sort
of
three-hat
dance
to
ensure
that
Trump’s
preferred
prosecutors
can
exercise
the
power
of
the
office
past
the
120-day
interim
term
set
out
in
28
USC
§
546.
First
she
appoints
the
crony
under
§
546;
then
she
purports
to
make
the
crony
their
own
first
assistant,
so
that
they
are
automatically
promoted
to
acting
US
Attorney
when
the
120
days
expires;
and
then
for
good
measure,
she
designates
the
crony
as
a
special
counsel
under
28
USC
§
515.
Bondi’s
relied
on
this
gambit
since
July,
when
she
first
used
it
for
John
Sarcone,
III
in
the
Northern
District
of
New
York.
And
even
when
courts
ruled
that
the
crony
can’t
hold
the
position
of
US
Attorney,
the
office’s
prosecutions
have
survived.
But
for
whatever
reason,
on
September
22
Bondi
appointed
Halligan
based
on
§
546
alone.
And
she’s
been
trying
to
undo
the
damage
ever
since.
On
Halloween,
Bondi
attempted
to
clean
up
the
mess
by
ratifying
the
indictment
and
retroactively
installing
Halligan
as
special
attorney
under
§
515
as
of
September
22.
Trick
or
treat!
There
are
several
problems
with
this
stratagem.
First
of
all,
that’s
not
how
linear
time
works,
Pam!
Second,
by
this
logic,
any
rando
off
the
street
could
present
a
case
to
a
grand
jury
—
which
is
more
or
less
what
happened
here
—
and
it
would
be
fine
as
long
as
the
AG
blessed
it
after
the
fact.
Why
bother
to
nominate
a
US
attorney
at
all?
At
Thursday’s
hearing
last
week,
Judge
Currie
suggested
Bondi
could
not
have
ratified
the
indictment
(or
indictments)
on
October
31
because
she
hadn’t
seen
the
full
presentment
to
the
grand
jury.
“It
became
obvious
to
me
that
the
attorney
general
could
not
have
reviewed
those
portions
of
the
transcript
presented
by
Ms.
Halligan,”
the
judge
said,
according
to
Politico.
By
the
government’s
own
admission
the
DOJ
did
not
request
a
transcript
of
the
“entire
recording”
until
after
being
ordered
to
do
so
in
Judge
Currie’s
second
order
on
November
4.
And
so,
on
Friday
Bondi
submitted
yet
another
declaration
purporting
to
re-ratify
the
indictment
based
on
a
review
of
the
“full”
record.
“For
the
avoidance
of
doubt,
I
have
reviewed
the
entirety
of
the
record
now
available
to
the
government
and
confirm
my
knowledge
of
the
material
facts
associated
with
the
grand
jury
proceedings,”
she
wrote
“Based
on
that
knowledge,
I
hereby
exercise
the
authority
vested
in
the
Attorney
General
by
law,
including
28
U.S.C.
§
509,
510,
and
518(b),
to
ratify
Ms.
Halligan’s
actions
before
the
grand
jury
and
her
signature
on
the
indictment
returned
by
the
grand
jury.”
Which
is
all
well
and
good
if
the
court
accepts
that
the
attorney
general
can
ratify
an
illegally
obtained
indictment
post
facto.
And
that
she
can
retroactively
appoint
someone
as
a
special
counsel.
And
that
there
really
are
no
more
“gaps”
in
the
record.
If
not
…
this
indictment
is
DOA.
Oh,
and
PS,
Cleary
was fired two
weeks
later.
Prolly
just
a
coincidence,
right?
Aaaaaaand
right
on
time,
Magistrate
Judge
Fitzpatrick
ordered
the
government
to
release
the
grand
jury
transcripts
to
Comey
based
on
a
mere
11
independent
grounds.
Subscribe
to
read
more
at
Law
and
Chaos….
Liz
Dye produces
the
Law
and
Chaos Substack and podcast. You
can
subscribe
by
clicking
the
logo:
