Letitia James’ early win from Biden-appointed judge linked to James Comey

A Biden-appointed judge handed corrupt New York Attorney General Letitia James a legal victory on Friday.

James was arraigned Friday morning in Virginia as per an indictment earlier this month accusing her of committing bank fraud and issuing false statements to a financial institution.

pic.twitter.com/fzwT8ppFhS

— April Color (@ColorApril) October 9, 2025

James’ case mirrors that of disgraced former FBI Director James Comey, who was indicted last month for making a false statement and obstructing a congressional proceeding.

Both were charged by the same person — U.S. Attorney Lindsey Halligan — which brings us to what happened Friday.

Ahead of her arraignment, James’ attorneys “gave notice that they intend to argue for a dismissal by challenging the legality of U.S. attorney Lindsey Halligan’s appointment,” according to New York magazine.

Incidentally, Comey is trying to do the thing vis-a-vis his case.

Jim Comey is challenging the appointment of Lindsey Halligan.

AKA

Jim Comey knows he’s cooked.

Oops! pic.twitter.com/oNSzkGqT39

— C3 (@C_3C_3) October 14, 2025

The basis for their complaints is that President Donald Trump hurriedly appointed Halligan after her predecessor refused to charge them.

Halligan “was tapped for the role after her predecessor, Erik Siebert, resigned under pressure due to his reluctance to seek charges against the two veteran public servants, as he believed the evidence in those matters was lacking,” New York magazine notes.

Here’s the twist — on Friday, James’ attorneys asked that her challenging of Halligan’s legality be combined with Comey’s challenging of her legality. U.S. District Judge Jamar Walker, a Biden appointee, approved her request.

“This judge, Jamal Walker, has decided that he is going to grant a request by James’ attorneys to have her motion essentially to disqualify Lindsey Halligan on the grounds that she was not lawfully appointed consolidated with that of Jim Comey, who also brought a similar motion,” MSNBC reported.

“They are going to be referred… to the chief judge of the Fourth Circuit of the US Court of Appeals for assignment to someone outside the Eastern District of Virginia,” the reporting continued.

BREAKING: The judge presiding over Letitia James’ case has just ALLOWED her motion to dismiss to be consolidated with James Comey’s motion.

“This judge, Jamal Walker, has decided that he is going to grant a request by James’ attorneys to have her motion essentially to… pic.twitter.com/j9gJcfARHV

— Gunther Eagleman (@GuntherEagleman) October 24, 2025

The decision came three days after the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals ordered Comey’s motion challenging Halligan’s legitimacy be transferred to Judge Cameron McGowan Currie, a Clinton appointee.

Thanks to Judge Walker’s decision on Friday, James’ motion will be consolidated with Comey’s motion and then presented to Currie.

This, observers argue, is a clear-cut win for James, though critics point to some other conclusions that can be gleaned from what’s happened.

Look:

Note that they’re not claiming innocence, they’re just saying the wrong person signed the paperwork to prosecute them.

— Keith Gross (@KeithGrossFL) October 24, 2025

Notice how nobody is actually arguing that Letitia James is innocent. She’s blatantly guilty and trying to do anything she can to avoid accountability.

— Paul A. Szypula (@Bubblebathgirl) October 24, 2025

This move screams damage control! They’re clearly trying to shield themselves by dragging out the process and complicating the legal path. Consolidating motions like this looks less like “procedure” and more like a strategy to delay and dodge accountability. The system needs to…

— Gen Tu (@GenTu7220) October 24, 2025

In making their own case for why Halligan should not be considered legitimate, Comey’s lawyers argued that she had indicted him purely to satiate the president’s anger and desire for revenge.

“In the ordinary case, a prosecutor’s charging decision is presumptively lawful and rests within her broad discretion. This is no ordinary case,” they wrote, according to The Guardian.

“Here, direct evidence establishes that the president harbors genuine animus toward Mr. Comey, including because of Mr. Comey’s protected speech, that he installed his personal attorney as a ‘stalking horse’ to carry out his bidding; and that she then prosecuted Mr. Comey – days before the statute of limitations expired, with a faulty indictment – to effectuate the president’s wishes,” they added.

Senior Staff Writer
[email protected]

V. Saxena is a staff writer for BizPac Review with a decade of experience as a professional writer, and a lifetime of experience as an avid news junkie. He holds a degree in computer technology from Purdue University.

Latest posts by Vivek Saxena (see all)

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.