Posted on 11/12/2025 9:30:24 AM PST by Red Badger
Paul Sperry shared some observations on the documents that Comey provided to the courts in his perjury case. One observation is shocking. According to Sperry, when presenting evidence in a motion to the court as part of his perjury defense, James Comey’s legal team altered two words in a transcript of his 2020 Senate testimony to make it seem as if Sen. Ted Cruz asked Comey a key question he didn’t actually ask him during the hearing. YOU CAN’T MAKE THIS STUFF UP.
NEW: In presenting evidence in a motion to the court as part of its perjury defense, James Comey's legal team altered two words in a transcript of his 2020 Senate testimony to make it seem as if Sen. Ted Cruz asked Comey a key question he didnt actually ask him during the hearing— Paul Sperry (@paulsperry_) November 11, 2025
The following question was asked of Duck.ai about what happened:
Can a defendant alter words in a transcript he presents as evidence in a trial?
The answer is:
No, a defendant cannot alter words in a transcript that is presented as evidence in a trial. Transcripts are official records that accurately capture what was said during legal proceedings. Altering them would be considered fraud and could lead to serious legal consequences, including charges of contempt of court or tampering with evidence.
Not so good for Comey.
His “super” attorneys also reportedly used a movie to support their argument in Comey’s case.
LOL: James Comey's high-priced legal team just cited a movie to support the argument Trump didn't have to directly instruct Halligan to indict Comey: "A ruler need not take the form of literal instructions. See Becket (1964 film) ('Will no one rid me of this meddlesome priest?')"— Paul Sperry (@paulsperry_) November 11, 2025
In their defense, Comey and his friend claimed they did nothing wrong, but they hid their identities in doing it.
James Comey and Dan Richman claim they weren't doing anything wrong when they leaked sensitive info to their NY Times handmaiden Michael Schmidt, yet they both used aliases in their emails and texts --with Comey posing as "Reinhold Niebuhr" and Richman posing as "Michael Garcia."— Paul Sperry (@paulsperry_) November 10, 2025
In addition, in Comey’s effort to claim vindictive prosecution, Comey’s attorneys have to do much more than they have to date.
NEW: To prove "vindictive prosecution," Comey's lawyers have to do more than show Trump's posts. They must show "direct evidence" PROSECUTOR HALLIGAN acted w/ "genuine animus" & "solely to punish" Comey for exercising a protected rt. They've failed to overcome the legal barriers.— Paul Sperry (@paulsperry_) November 11, 2025
It looks like Comey’s associates, accomplices, and attorneys will fabricate anything and insert it into the court documents to make their point. Not good.
If this is true his attorneys need to be prosecuted and disbarred.
L
They may be in deeper doo-doo than Comey..................
I have to think that this is just people doing “business as usual” without fully realizing that the climate has changed. It is no longer business as usual, but they haven’t quite caught on yet.
But, basically, The US DOJ used to pretend to prosecute corrupt government officials. And the corrupt government officials would pretend to build a serious defense for the court. And after the pretending was done, everyone would just go home and nothing would really happen.
Comey’s team lying in court documents on a case about lying just seems like a perfect example of people going through the motions, with complete confidence that nothing can possibly happen to them. It’s all pretend, right?
It is a sign of desperation, thinking that no one would notice...............
the two words altered went from “Clinton Administration” to “Clinton Investigation”.
Only one word was actually changed.
Why is there no post of what Sen. Cruz actually asked vs. what they changed?
Which Venue which Judge is everything now.
How often are lawyers disbarred?
Red Badger I read this entire article and I still don’t know which “two words” were altered. Did I miss something?
Post 6.................
More often they surrender their license after a while because no firm will hire them, no lawyer will partner with them, and former clients go elsewhere.
No big deal. It was only two words; like “innocent” or “guilty”.
Didn’t Hillary lose her position from a law firm for changing the wording of a cite during Watergate?
It all depends on what the definition of the word is is....
I’m no attorney, but it seems to me that even a first-year law student would know better than to do something that stupid.
She was bounced by counsel to the watergate committee when she advised Nixon was not allowed to have legal representation according to her research regarding prior impeachments. She lied and was fired.
Holy Prince Harry, Batman!
Once they arrive in Gitmo they may get a clue. Certainly not before.
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.