If you wanted to see the meticulous dismantling of a foundational constitutional principle, you should have been in Alexandria, Virginia, last Thursday. What unfolded wasn’t justice; it was a demonstration of how quickly the legal system can be bent to political will, and how fragile our institutions truly are.
James Comey, the former FBI Director, has been indicted. Let’s not pretend for a moment that Comey is a figure of unimpeachable character. His tenure was a masterclass in hubris and poor judgment, earning him the ire of nearly everyone. But the merits of Comey’s actions are irrelevant to the far graver concern here: the process by which this indictment was secured, and what it signals for the very idea of equal justice under the law in this republic.
The final vote from the grand jury was a squeaker at 14-12, barely clearing the lowest possible bar. This wasn’t a robust case built on overwhelming evidence; it was a desperate scramble to justify a pre-determined outcome, a legal charade that shames the very concept of an impartial justice system.
The facts surrounding this indictment aren’t about partisanship; they are about a flagrant violation of the constitutional separation of powers and the hallowed independence of the Justice Department. This wasn’t an investigation; it was a political directive from the highest office in the land, executed with chilling precision.
We saw principled men get steamrolled. Erik Siebert, a 15-year veteran of the department, chose to resign rather than prosecute a case he believed lacked sufficient evidence. His departure, he told staff, “was the easiest thing” he had ever done. When career professionals, who have sworn an oath to the Constitution, would rather abandon their livelihoods than participate in a legal action, it screams of profound ethical compromise.
His replacement? A personal lawyer to the President with no prior prosecutorial experience, hastily installed and given a clear mandate: secure the indictment. We watched as this new appointee, reportedly unfamiliar with the very courthouse, personally presented a bare-bones indictment to a grand jury, overriding the judgment of career subordinates. This isn’t how a Justice Department committed to the Constitution operates. This is how a political arm of the executive branch functions.
The gravest indictment here isn’t against James Comey. It’s against the foundational principle of a Justice Department insulated from political manipulation. The most powerful statement came in a single sentence from Troy Edwards, Jr., a prosecutor in that same office. He tendered his resignation, not to defend his father-in-law, but “to uphold my oath to the Constitution and the country.” He saw the institution he served being corrupted from the inside out and chose his oath over his career. When such individuals, dedicated to the Constitution, feel compelled to abandon their posts, it means the very bedrock of our legal system is under assault.
The argument that “they did it to us first” – whether referencing past political investigations or contrasting the treatment of January 6th defendants – is irrelevant to the core constitutional principle at stake. Weaponization, regardless of which party wields it, is still weaponization. The answer to past abuses of power is not to legitimize those abuses by replicating them. It is to restore fidelity to the Constitution.
In this case, James Comey stands accused. But there’s an unindicted co-conspirator here: the very ideal of equal justice under the law. It was mortally wounded last week. By celebrating the outcome, regardless of the target, we are inadvertently endorsing a system where the legal process becomes a tool for political retribution, eroding the constitutional order for all.
We wanted accountability within the confines of the Constitution. Instead, we got a political vendetta disguised as justice, a dangerous precedent that threatens the integrity of our entire system. And as we now hear whispers—initially from the President, and soon, undoubtedly, from others—about how many actual FBI agents were embedded at January 6th, the questions about political influence within our law enforcement agencies only deepen. We’ll delve into that unsettling new layer next.
