News From U.S. Corporations and Major Newspapers

Friday’s dismissal of the Department of Justice case against David Hearn for vandalism of the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool came days after Hearn’s lawyers asked for transcripts of the grand jury proceedings that led to the indictment. The lawyers noted that the government’s only witness testified that the pool was already damaged before Hearn went near it, and that the witness could not quantify the cost of any damage Hearn might have done over and above the cost of repairing the existing damage. The lawyers told the court there were “irregularities in the government’s presentation of the evidence to the grand jury” that “call into question whether the grand jury was misled.” The Department of Justice has been caught repeatedly misleading grand juries or committing misconduct in getting indictments. Hearn’s lawyers were suggesting that the Department of Justice engaged in the same misconduct in the indictment of David Hearn for damaging the bottom of the reflecting pool. In their filing, they noted that a judge and former federal prosecutor in the District of Columbia had recently stated that “[g]enerations of presidential administrations and public officials” have reinforced the idea, called the “presumption of regularity,” that public officials do their jobs properly, operate in good faith, and follow correct procedures. But, the judge noted, “In just six months, the President of the United States may have forfeited the right to such a presumption.” On July 28, J. David McSwane, Pratheek Rebala, and Carla Astudillo of ProPublica reported that judges across the country are calling out lawyers for the Department of Justice, questioning whether they can be trusted to tell the truth and whether they are operating according to centuries-old norms. Judges have called behavior by Department of Justice lawyers “unlawful,” “unethical,” “unseemly,” and otherwise dishonest. The degradation of the Department of Justice, which is charged with defending the rule of law for the American people, into an instrument of Trump’s political wrath has been illustrated in the fight over the confirmation of Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche to attorney general. Before going to the Department of Justice, Blanche was Trump’s personal attorney. He led Trump’s criminal defense team in the case of falsifying records to cover up hush-money payments to adult film actress Stormy Daniels, as well as his defense against the two cases brought by special counsel Jack Smith: the one indicting him for trying to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election and the one indicting him for retaining classified documents after leaving office. Since he took over for former attorney general Pam Bondi, Blanche has openly flouted the law in order to do Trump’s bidding. He secured indictments against people Trump perceives to be enemies, including former FBI director James Comey for posting on Instagram a picture of seashells arranged to form the number “8647.” On July 29, Devlin Barrett and Alan Feuer of the New York Times reported that the Secret Service agents who interviewed Comey in May 2025 were told to send a summary of that interview as quickly as possible to Trump on Air Force One. Trump’s close involvement in the case, the authors wrote, “is one of the most glaring examples to date of the degree to which Mr. Trump now directs federal law enforcement actions.” On July 28, Comey’s lawyers filed motions to throw out on the grounds of vindictive and selective prosecution the federal charges Blanche brought against him. They noted that Trump had repeatedly made it clear he wanted Comey indicted, even going so far as to put his former special assistant Lindsey Halligan into office as the U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, where she indicted Comey just four days later. (That appointment was later found to be invalid.) The filings from Comey’s lawyers appear to show that FBI officers engaged in warrantless surveillance of Comey. Like the lawyers in the Hearn case, Comey’s lawyers suggested that “irregularities in the grand jury process influenced the grand jury to return an indictment.” Like Hearn’s lawyers, they asked the court to “disclose the transcripts and audio recordings of all proceedings before the grand jury in this case” or to review them himself to make sure they followed the law. In a previous case against Comey, they note, Magistrate Judge William Fitzpatrick found that the government’s actions raised “genuine issues of misconduct” that were “inextricably linked to the government’s grand jury presentation.” Blanche’s indictment of Comey to please Trump colors another of his actions: he backed the deal Trump made with the Department of Justice to establish a $1.776 billion slush fund to pay off those convicted of committing crimes surrounding Trump’s attempt to overturn the results of the 2020 election, including storming the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021. Blanche put his name to the second half of that deal that seems to be being eclipsed by the slush fund but is clearly Trump’s main interest: an agreement between Trump and the Department of Justice promising to drop any pending claims against Trump, his oldest sons, or the Trump Organization for past illegalities in tax returns, and promising not to conduct audits of Trump’s tax returns. That slush fund/nonprosecution deal has been a sticking point for Blanche’s Senate confirmation to attorney general, as two Republican senators—John Cornyn of Texas and Thom Tillis of North Carolina—want him to put in writing that the deal is as dead as he claimed it is in his confirmation hearing before they agree to support his nomination. But he has refused to do so. On Thursday, Trump suggested he was willing to withdraw Blanche’s nomination until Cornyn and Tillis are out of office, leaving him as acting attorney general. Then, at 7:03 Friday morning, Trump threw a monkey wrench into this fight by posting that in fact, he emphatically supports the slush fund. He appears to reject the idea that it is dead, and seems to be counting on Todd Blanche to implement it, exactly as critics have said. Trump seems to have been thwarted from getting his way quietly by putting Blanche in as attorney general without any promise to kill the slush fund and its accompanying promise not to prosecute Trump or his associates for crimes associated with their tax filings. And so, on Friday, Trump filed notice that he and the rest of the parties to the “agreement” will appeal the July 13 ruling by U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams. She said that the suit that led to the $1.776 billion slush fund and the accompanying nonprosecution promise was filed to “manipulate the judicial process.” Williams said the Justice Department could not claim the deal it made with the Trumps was a judicial agreement. At 7:32 Saturday morning, Trump posted: “If Senators Cornyn and Tillis, both upset because I wouldn’t Endorse them (they lost, and quit, respectively!), aren’t going to approve Todd Blanche, one of the most respected professionals, according to everybody, in the Country, to be the United States Attorney General, then I will keep Todd as Acting A.G., and push hard to get the Anti-Weaponization Bill, which takes care of those who have been so badly treated by the Crooked Joe Biden (and Obuma!) Administration (I get nothing, although I was treated horribly!), PASSED. Todd Blanche was a voice of reason! It will immediately be back on the table, and I will get it done. Thank you for your attention to this matter! President DJT” — Notes: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/justice-department/reflecting-pool-case-witness-conceded-damage-olympic-canoeist-davey-he-rcna589510 https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/28517032-hearn-filing/ https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/grand-jury-skullduggery-reflecting-pool-edition https://www.propublica.org/article/justice-department-presumption-of-regularity https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-todd-blanche-nomination-attorney-general-cornyn-tillis/ https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nced.227449/gov.uscourts.nced.227449.38.0.pdf https://www.cbsnews.com/news/james-comey-claims-doj-conducted-illegal-surveillance-new-motion-to-dismissal-trump-threat-charges/ https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/appeals-ruling-found-10-billion-irs-suit-aimed-manipulate-legal-rcna590307 https://www.nytimes.com/2026/07/29/us/james-comey-seashells-trump-secret-service.html Trumpstruth.org: statuses/40402 statuses/40409 Share

Comey’s lawyers argue the seashells post is protected political speech, citing the Supreme Court’s 1969 Watts decision that allows criticism of government

“I hope Jim goes to jail for his crimes,” a key government witness wrote in an email to the former FBI director’s wife.

The prosecution’s central claim “would be laughable,” one former federal judge noted, if it weren’t intended “to deprive a man of his liberty.”

THE PROSECUTION OF JAMES COMEY is dead, to begin with. There is no doubt whatever about that. It is as dead as a doornail. The manner of its death has yet to be determined, to be sure. But there is no doubt that it is dead. This must be distinctly understood, or nothing terrifying can come of the story I am going to relate. To be sure, its death is, in some ways, disappointing. Who does not yearn for a full-blown public trial where the government’s proof is exposed for the bag of vacuous nonsense that it is? The spectacle would sell popcorn by the bucketful—and with good reason. Consider just a couple of the showstoppers that we are going to miss (summarized from Comey’s motion to dismiss and motion to suppress): Comey was, infamously, indicted for posting a picture of some seashells that formed the phrase “86 47.” The government’s charge claims that the use of the number “86” was a true threat against President Trump—an incitement to violence and a reference to assassination or murder. Leaving aside First Amendment issues, the government’s prosecution of Comey faces an extremely difficult factual problem: proving that to “86” someone or something actually means to kill or destroy it, and that this destructive meaning is what Comey intended to convey. The question is fraught because the origin of the phrase, in the 1930s, refers to the much more benign idea of asking someone to leave, or reporting that an item is out of stock. To bolster the argument, the prosecutors went to the trouble of contacting well-known mafioso Salvatore “Sammy the Bull” Gravano. But he said that the mob would never use “86” to mean to kill someone because it was “too obvious.” True facts.Sharp analysis.Honest opinions.Make sure you miss none of The Bulwark_—join_ Bulwark+ today. FREE TRIAL: Get Bulwark+for 14 days The Bull went on to suggest that DOJ contact John Gleeson, one of the most famous, longtime mafia prosecutors in recent history. DOJ didn’t do so, but Comey’s team did— and Gleeson told them that “the claim that ‘86’ is mafia jargon for ‘kill’ is preposterous.” Or consider the problem known today as “Person-1.” Person-1 (who knew Comey’s wife, Patrice) has said that he is convinced that Comey knew the meaning of the “86” and intended it in its more violent meaning. But Person-1’s initial reaction was that “86” had the food-service meaning of being out of stock. Only after listening to an episode of Rudy Giuliani’s podcast did he come to believe that Comey (who worked on mafia prosecutions) must have known that “86” was code for murder. Imagine how amusing, entertaining, and painful a live cross-examination of Person-1 would be: Defense counsel: Did you talk with Mr. Comey? Person-1: No I did not. Defense counsel: Then how do you know he meant the malicious meaning of “86”? Person-1: He must have known it from his mafia prosecution days. Defense counsel: Well, then would it change your mind if you knew that the foremost mafia prosecutor in America said that the mafia would never use “86” to mean “kill”? Person-1: [Blank stare; stuttering; cold sweats.] It is a shame that we will be deprived of this sort of magical public moment. But whether on this basis or because the indictment is deemed a vindictive prosecution, we are never going to see this show. The Comey prosecution is dead—its death sentence just hasn’t been written yet. Share ALL OF WHICH MAKES THIS EPISODE both pathetic and still, in some ways, frightening. The case against Comey is shockingly weak, and it comes as the Senate considers the nomination of Todd Blanche, the Trump-appointed lawyer who approved the prosecution and pushed it forward at his master’s behest, to be attorney general. The terror comes not from the prosecution itself but from the almost casual way in which such vacuous prosecutions have become commonplace—so much so that Blanche may yet be confirmed, and if he is not confirmed, it will not be because of his politically biased use of the law but only because of Trump’s rapacious graft. The Comey prosecution joins a long line of baseless politicized prosecutions and investigations: Comey the first time, Letitia James, Adam Schiff, sandwich guy, the Olympic canoer at the Reflecting Pool, “immigration crimes” in Minnesota, the list goes on and on and on. For an attorney general to bring even one of these cases would have been an impeachable transgression in any other administration (arguably including even Trump 1.0). Today, such abuses have become normalized—so much so that they have gotten nary a mention in the ongoing Blanche confirmation fight. Virtually all of these benighted assaults on neutrality and the rule of law occurred on Todd Blanche’s watch as deputy attorney general and now acting attorney general. He has lied, almost casually, about their provenance. We now know, for example, that emails from the day of Comey’s Secret Service interview show that the agents were sending real-time updates to Trump on Air Force One. And now we find out that the Secret Service initially declined the matter, and that Blanche’s aides directed the renewed investigation. Nevertheless, Blanche has had the chutzpah to deny that Comey was prosecuted for political reasons. Earlier this year he told CBS News that the case was being brought by “local prosecutors” in North Carolina (it was a Trump-appointed prosecutor and his hand-picked assistant originally from New Jersey, but I suppose everyone is local to somewhere). When asked in another CBS interview whether Trump directed the indictment, Blanche said: “Of course not, absolutely, positively not.” All of this used to matter. The rule of law and the neutral application of prosecutorial authority used to be bedrock principles of American jurisprudence. Yet, today, Blanche is running the Department of Justice. He may yet be denied Senate confirmation—but it will not, sadly, be because Republican senators have finally had enough of political prosecutions. In considering Blanche’s nomination, senators see the ghosts of political prosecutions past and present. But they do not reject the ghosts of prosecution future. By not rejecting Blanche on this basis alone, the senators are, in effect, allowing their silence to speak volumes of acquiescence in aberrant behavior. The prosecution of Comey is dead. Of that there can be no doubt. But the fact that a majority of Republican senators do not care that it is dead on arrival and are willing to countenance the confirmation of its architect means something far more terrifying, for them and for the country: The rule of law is now also almost dead. Share

Following James Comey’s indictment in April, prosecutors sought the aid of gangster Sammy “The Bull” Gravano to build their case, Comey’s lawyers claim in a court filing.

Ex-FBI chief James Comey says the president sought notes from an investigation into an image of seashells he posted, for which he’s now facing charges.

The vindictive and meritless plot against the former FBI director is being orchestrated almost entirely in public view.

James Comey is taking another angle in his effort to dismiss an indictment stemming from a picture of seashells he posted on Instagram, telling a North Carolina federal judge that the government is pursuing the “vindictive” case because of President Donald Trump’s “deep-seated animosity” toward the former FBI director.

James Comey is taking another angle in his effort to dismiss an indictment stemming from a picture of seashells he posted on Instagram, telling a North Carolina federal judge that the government is pursuing the “vindictive” case because of President Donald Trump’s “deep-seated animosity” toward the former FBI director.

The Secret Service asserted a nonexistent “emergency” to track Comey’s cellphone, and the FBI’s evidence falls far short of proving his seashell picture was a crime.

Former FBI Director James Comey filed multiple motions seeking to “86” the indictment for his “86 47” seashell post, listing numerous examples of outrageous and egregious behavior by the DOJ.

Federal officials have misled judges, submitted false statements and withheld key facts during the course of the investigation into former FBI director James Comey. That’s according to new defense filings

WASHINGTON (AP) — Federal officials involved in the prosecution of James Comey misled judges, submitted documents containing false statements and withheld key facts during the course of the investigation, according

The new details emerged in a series of court filings from Comey’s defense team.

James Comey’s attorneys say the Secret Service conducted what they call “illegal electronic surveillance” of the former FBI director.