Posted on 11/21/2025 3:04:17 AM PST by Libloather
Interim US Attorney Lindsey Halligan suggested Wednesday that the Biden-appointed judge overseeing the criminal case against former FBI Director James Comey violated judicial conduct rules by asking if she was a “puppet” of President Trump.
District Judge Michael Nachmanoff asked Comey’s defense lawyer if he thought Halligan, the prosecutor who brought the indictment against the former FBI boss, was acting as a “puppet” or “stalking horse” of the commander in chief, during a hearing in an Alexandria, Va., courtroom.
“Personal attacks — like Judge Nachmanoff referring to me as a ‘puppet’ — don’t change the facts or the law,” Halligan exclusively told The Post.
“The Judicial Canons require judges to be ‘patient, dignified, respectful, and courteous to litigants, jurors, witnesses, lawyers, and others with whom the judge deals in an official capacity’ … and to ‘act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary,’” she continued.
“My focus remains on the record and the law, and I will continue to fulfill my responsibilities with professionalism,” Halligan added.
Attorney General Pam Bondi appointed Halligan at Trump’s behest to serve as interim US attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia following the September resignation of Erik Siebert – whom the president had accused of deliberately refusing to charge Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James.
Halligan secured the federal grand jury indictment against Comey six days after Seibert’s resignation.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
Dear FRiends,
We need your continuing support to keep FR funded. Your donations are our sole source of funding. No sugar daddies, no advertisers, no paid memberships, no commercial sales, no gimmicks, no tax subsidies. No spam, no pop-ups, no ad trackers.
If you enjoy using FR and agree it's a worthwhile endeavor, please consider making a contribution today:
Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you,
Jim
District Judge Michael Nachmanoff asked Comey’s defense lawyer if he thought Halligan, the prosecutor who brought the indictment against the former FBI boss, was acting as a “puppet” or “stalking horse”
Yup...that’s some blind justice right there...no sign of bias at all.
Lindsey Halligan rips CNN guest who called her an ‘Apprentice girl’ — despite appearing on the show herself
Sounding like District Judge Michael Nachmanoff, is a puppet for the CIA/FBI deep state actors.
“Interim US Attorney Lindsey Halligan suggested Wednesday that the Biden-appointed judge overseeing the criminal case against former FBI Director James Comey violated judicial conduct rules by asking if she was a “puppet” of President Trump.”
She should sue bozo black robe for gender discrimination and gender harassment. That are strictly forbidden for FedGuv employees. This Judge clown gets the same FedGuv paycheck that CIA janitors get. Only with more zeroes at the end.
When the dems are wrong, which is 90% of the time, they resort to childish name calling, ridiculous accusations, and outright slander. They have no backbone, no morals, no conscience. They are the real “puppets”, puppets of the deep state, aka “swamp”.
BUMP
Just another Jewish Democrat MAGISTRATE!!
In other words, these women are jealous of Lindsey Halligan.
Projecting much judge?
It is long past due that these judges financials and computer history need to be investigated
Objection, misleading!
“...Judge Michael Nachmanoff asked Comey’s defense lawyer if he thought Halligan had stopped beating puppies and kittens...”
Are you sure?
Well Judge NackManOff seems to have errors…. Google Nack….
This feral judge Nachmanoff sounds like another Boasberg. There seems to be an endless supply of them dug into the judiciary.
Bkmk
This is performative outrage.
The question was in respond to a motion to dismiss based on “vindictive prosecution” and it’s not unusual for a judge to strip down overly wordy and overly flowering motions to the starkest, even most provocative, language possible when questioning the filer.
Ordinarily, good attorneys on the other side see this kind of thing as a gift: it gives perfect insight into what elements of the motion the judge is skeptical of and depending on how the filer responds? Also makes it easier to oppose the motion generally.
Sorry to say, but as a prosecutor friend told me over dinner last night “She’s now playing to a public audience because she loused up the filing and this case is likely to get booted long before trial.”
Judge Michael Nackmanoff should change the “N” to a “J” in his last name to reflect his female bias.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.