DOJ Weighs New Charges Against Comey Over Alleged Classified Leaks

Federal prosecutors in the Eastern District of Virginia have reignited a previously shelved investigation into whether former FBI Director James Comey unlawfully disclosed classified information through an intermediary to the media, according to sources familiar with the matter. The renewed effort marks yet another legal front involving a figure long criticized by President Donald J. Trump.

At the heart of the case is Comey’s decision to share sensitive memos detailing his private conversations with then-President Trump. Those memos were passed to Daniel Richman, a Columbia University law professor and close associate, who then conveyed their contents to The New York Times. The disclosures ultimately fueled a May 2017 front-page report that helped ignite the now-discredited Russia collusion narrative during the early days of Trump’s first term.

If prosecutors move forward, the case would represent the third criminal matter involving Comey pursued under the Trump-era Justice Department since last fall. In addition to the Virginia probe, Comey is reportedly facing scrutiny in Florida tied to a broader conspiracy investigation, as well as a North Carolina grand jury indictment returned April 28 concerning an alleged social media threat targeting the president.

Sources indicate that senior officials within the Justice Department, including aides to acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, have recently engaged in meetings with a select group of prosecutors in Virginia to assess next steps. While no final determination has been made regarding whether to pursue charges in Virginia or potentially shift jurisdiction to New York—where Richman resides—the renewed activity signals growing momentum inside the DOJ.

The development underscores what President Trump and his allies have long described as the need to hold entrenched bureaucratic actors accountable. Trump has repeatedly pointed to figures like Comey as emblematic of a politicized “deep state” that sought to undermine his presidency.

Ironically, the legal framework that may now be used against Comey mirrors arguments advanced by federal authorities in prior cases. During the Mar-a-Lago documents litigation led by special counsel Jack Smith, the DOJ and FBI maintained that any document deemed “classified” by the executive branch was beyond judicial scrutiny or public disclosure. The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld that interpretation, effectively granting broad authority to federal agencies over classification determinations.

That precedent could prove pivotal. If current officials determine that Comey’s memos—memorializing presidential discussions on national security—meet the threshold for classification, his long-standing claim that the materials were unclassified may no longer hold under the same standard previously defended by his allies.

The investigation had initially stalled after an earlier review but has since been revived under Blanche’s leadership. It is separate from a prior prosecution in Virginia in which Comey faced allegations of making false statements to Congress about his handling of leaks. That case was dismissed on procedural grounds tied to the appointment of then-U.S. Attorney Lindsey Halligan, and the statute of limitations ultimately expired.

However, before the dismissal, prosecutors had already introduced extensive evidence into the court record, including documentation of Comey’s communications with Richman. That material now forms the backbone of the revived investigation, which centers on national security concerns and is not subject to the same statutory time constraints.

According to those records, Comey formally brought Richman on as a special government employee in 2015, effectively using him as a conduit to the press. Emails presented in court show Comey operating under the alias “Reinhold Niebuhr7,” directing Richman to coordinate with reporters—particularly New York Times journalist Michael Schmidt—to shape narratives around sensitive investigations, including the Clinton email probe and the Russia inquiry.

The arrangement extended beyond casual communication. Richman reportedly helped orchestrate talking points, facilitated off-the-record briefings, and served as a buffer between Comey and the media. In some instances, internal records even reference the use of secure FBI facilities to dispose of classified materials, highlighting the level of care taken to manage information flows while limiting direct exposure.

Richman is also linked to a broader network of legal and media figures aligned with Comey, including Benjamin Wittes. Critics argue that this network enabled the strategic dissemination of government-held information while preserving plausible deniability.

As it stands, Comey faces potential legal jeopardy across multiple jurisdictions, with the revived classified-leaks investigation now taking center stage. For many observers, the case represents a critical test of whether accountability will be applied evenly within the nation’s top law enforcement institutions.