To echo a sentiment from a fellow native of Missouri, rumors of the demise of the Comey prosecution have been greatly overstated. In late September, former FBI Director James Comey faced indictment on two charges related to statements he made during a congressional hearing in September 2020.

On Wednesday afternoon, interest peaked after a case hearing regarding a motion by Comey’s defense to dismiss the charges on grounds of vindictive prosecution. During the proceedings, Eastern District of Virginia Judge Michael Nachmanoff intensely questioned DOJ attorneys about an alleged inconsistency between the indictment form shown to the grand jury and the final version filed in court.

1. False statements within the jurisdiction of the legislative branch of the United States Government [18 U.S.C. § 1001(a)(2)]
2. Obstruction of a Congressional proceeding [18 U.S.C. § 1505]

This scrutiny led to some rather foreboding headlines:

Adding to the developments, Magistrate Judge William Fitzpatrick earlier ordered the DOJ on Monday to provide grand jury materials to Comey’s defense—a move that deviates from the usual practice of withholding such materials from the defense.

Prosecutors revealed the lapse under questioning by the judge overseeing the case. Comey’s attorneys argued the omission warrants dismissing the indictment. The judge did not immediately rule.

…

In a back-and-forth in Judge Michael Nachmanoff’s courtroom in the Eastern District of Virginia on Wednesday, DOJ attorney Tyler Lemons admitted that the indictment handed up on Comey was never fully reviewed by the full grand jury. Instead, Halligan brought an altered version to the magistrate’s courtroom for the grand jury’s foreperson to sign.

This, in turn, produced rather ominous-sounding headlines like:

And that was on the heels of a Monday ruling by Magistrate Judge William Fitzpatrick ordering the DOJ to turn over grand jury materials to the defense — materials which normally would not be shared with the defense.