EXCLUSIVE: 'I'm NOT going to stop criticizing him' James Comey SPEAKS OUT after seashell indictment

[0:00] Well, they're back. This time about a picture of seashells on a North Carolina beach a year ago. [0:09] And this won't be the end of it. But nothing has changed with me. I'm still innocent. I'm still [0:15] not afraid. And I still believe in the independent federal judiciary. So let's go. This won't be the [0:24] end of it. Hi again, everybody. It's now five o'clock. It was almost exactly one year ago. [0:28] The former director of the FBI, Jim Comey, was on this program at this table talking about that [0:34] picture of seashells that he came across on a walk on the beach. They spell out eight, six, [0:40] four, seven. And he's continuing to stand by what he told us then, that at the time he didn't know [0:46] there was any violent interpretation behind that commonly used restaurant term, 86, and that he [0:53] did not at any point intend for his post to be perceived that way. And certainly not for it to [0:58] be viewed as a call for the assassination of number 47. But he deleted the post when he heard [1:05] that those sorts of things were being alleged, including by Donald Trump and members of his [1:10] cabinet. Fast forward to right now, with Donald Trump's Department of Justice eager to deliver [1:16] on Trump's wish to prosecute his critics. Jim Comey is facing his second indictment from the [1:22] Trump Justice Department in the last year. This latest one over that picture we just had up [1:27] on charges that he was, quote, knowingly and willfully making a threat to take the life of [1:33] and to inflict bodily harm on the president. And second, that he knowingly and willfully transmitted [1:40] in interstate commerce a threat to kill the president. The federal judge has set a date for his trial [1:46] of July 15th. The case is so weak and far-fetched that, as we've reported on this program, [1:53] even some of Donald Trump's staunchest legal allies have decried it as an unconstitutional attack [2:00] on free press. There was this from Fox News commentator Jonathan Turley, quote, [2:06] I would prefer to crawl into one of Comey's conversant shells and write a column supporting [2:11] him. However, here we are. The fact is that I believe that this indictment is facially [2:17] unconstitutional, absent some unknown new facts, end quote. Another Fox News fixture, Andy McCarthy, [2:23] wrote this in the National Review this weekend, quote, [2:27] Nobody doubts that 47 refers to Trump, the 47th president of the United States. The question is [2:32] what 86 means. On that score, acting AG Todd Blanche is flailing. The term, as we shall see, [2:39] is ambiguous and most commonly understood to be nonviolent. Countless others continue to go [2:45] uncharged for the same conduct. This all-out effort to target Trump's former FBI director is causing [2:51] massive turmoil in places we can always see inside the Department of Justice. On that, [2:56] the Washington Post writes this, quote, More than a half dozen prosecutors have been demoted or pushed [3:01] out of the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of Virginia due to fallout from the Justice [3:07] Department's push to prosecute former FBI director Jim Comey, leaving a key prosecutorial office [3:13] understaffed and weakened. Other prosecutors have voluntarily decamped or scrambled to find new jobs, [3:19] fearful. They could be asked to work on cases that violate their principles. That's according to 10 [3:25] current and former prosecutors familiar with the office in the case. Major cases, including one [3:31] involving a terrorist attack in Afghanistan, have been hobbled by the turmoil. Washington Post has [3:36] this, quote, As the Justice Department gears up for the second prosecution of Comey, the cost to the [3:42] Department of the president's crusade are mounting. The shockwaves rippling through the Justice [3:46] Department underline the high price of the president's single-minded pursuit of his adversaries [3:52] to its personnel, resources, and mission. That is where we begin the hour, joining us for his first [3:57] interview since he was indicted by the Trump Justice Department for a second time, former director [4:02] of the FBI Jim Comey. His new book, Red Verdict, is his fourth novel. It's out tomorrow. I finished it [4:08] this afternoon. We're going to talk about it. You dedicate it, though, to the men and women I just [4:14] reported on, that The Washington Post reports on, the men and women who've either been purged from [4:19] or have left the Department of Justice. Yeah, there's a lot of pain in the department right [4:24] now. Good people sacrificing their careers to do the right thing. I'm inspired by that, [4:29] but I feel awful that they have to do it. And there are so many other good ones hanging on, [4:34] trying not to have to leave the department. It's a time of pain and loss for a lot of good people. [4:39] That's why I talked about them in my dedication and the acknowledgments. [4:43] What is your family's pain like right now? [4:48] Look, it's bad to be indicted. It's bad when someone you love is indicted. But they've kind [4:53] of gotten used to the fact that because I've been a critic of Donald Trump, I'm a target. I'm sure [4:58] John Brennan's family feels that way, Jim Clapper's family, and lots of others. There's a cost to [5:03] speaking up in this strange era, awful era we're in now. And I think they accept that. I think they're [5:10] proud that I act the way I do. I'm not going to be quiet. I'm going to continue to speak about what I [5:14] believe. But of course, it's a burden for a family. That to me is a part that I regret, [5:19] but they're strong people. [5:21] You had other family members serving in the department, your daughter and your son-in-law. [5:26] Right. My daughter was a superstar prosecutor in the Southern District of New York and was fired [5:30] only because she has my last name. That's stupid. That's immoral. That's illegal, in my view, [5:36] and painful. She'll be okay. I mean, she got a job at a law firm, [5:40] and someday I hope she'll go back to the Department of Justice. My son-in-law, [5:43] who was the deputy chief of national security at that Virginia U.S. attorney's office, [5:47] quit the day they first indicted me. Also just a tragedy to have that apolitical talent leave the [5:53] department. God willing, he'll be back someday. But it both tells you the quality of the people [5:58] that this organization typically has and the cost with Donald Trump at the top. [6:02] Do you know Todd Blanche? Did you ever run in the same SDMI circles? [6:06] I don't. I think he might have been a paralegal when I was the U.S. attorney there, [6:10] but I don't know him. I'm not saying that to be facetious. I think he started out as a paralegal, [6:15] which is an important role, but you don't have much to do with the U.S. attorney. [6:19] I ask because I went back and looked, and Donald Trump first used Twitter to call for your [6:24] prosecution in 2017 or 18, and some combination of Don McGahn, then the White House counsel, [6:30] Jeff Sessions, then the U.S. attorney, Bill Barr, who came next. There was one guy in between. [6:35] And then Pam Bondi, I guess, who allowed this to go forward, but only at great cost of that office, [6:43] which was essentially hollowed out. The variable isn't Donald Trump's desire to see you prosecuted. [6:47] It's Todd Blanche. And so I wonder if you think there's anything personal there. [6:52] I don't think so. I think it's just Donald Trump continuing to move through people until he finds [6:56] those who will literally do whatever he says. Maybe he's found that with Mr. Blanche. Maybe not. [7:01] Maybe his standards will be too high, as apparently Pam Bondi's were, which is a bit of a shock. [7:05] Just saying something. [7:06] Yeah. And so she's apparently headed for some important private sector job we haven't heard [7:09] about yet. That may be Mr. Blanche's future, or maybe not. I don't know. But Donald Trump has a [7:14] bottomless desire to gain revenge against those who've criticized him. And I'm not going to stop [7:20] criticizing him because I think that's required if you care about America. And so it will just keep [7:25] going. If he gets rid of Blanche, he'll try to find someone else. Look at the bottom of every barrel. [7:29] There are still apples. And so he will find someone to do what he wants to do. [7:34] Do you think that's where we are with Todd Blanche at the bottom of the barrel? [7:37] Only time will tell. I mean, Pam Bondi, I thought, was not a good fit for the role, [7:42] and her standards were apparently too high. So we'll see. [7:46] What is it that you are accused of doing? [7:49] In the current indictment? [7:50] Mm-hmm. [7:51] But communicating, making and communicating a threat to assassinate the president of the United States. [7:55] And what did you actually do? What is your defense? [7:58] I'm not going to talk about that because I, as I've said many times, I believe in the [8:02] independent federal judiciary. And the court rules require that if you're participating in [8:07] a criminal case, you don't talk about it outside of court. And so we'll have a lot to say in the [8:11] courtroom. But I want to respect the rules and the court. [8:14] Then, absent any specifics, I mean, he has said to my colleague, Kristen Welker, [8:21] that they're not investigating anyone else who posted this message, 8647, just you. [8:26] Were you aware that you were under investigation? Or are you aware of what the other evidence is [8:31] they have other than that message, which is on Amazon right now for sale? [8:36] Yeah, I hate to stiff-arm you, but I'm going to do the same thing. It's very important that we [8:40] respect and obey the rules of the federal court in North Carolina and everywhere, even if others [8:45] don't. And so I'm not going to talk about that. Except to say, as I said earlier, I am not only not [8:50] guilty, I am innocent. And we will pursue this fully. [8:54] The first time you were indicted, you released a video like that. And you—and I think you said [9:02] it last time around this show—you talked about your faith in the independent judiciary. [9:05] Do you think that is the only leg standing? [9:10] Yes. With the exception of something that John Brennan mentioned in your last segment, that [9:14] there are good people holding the line in the intelligence community, in the law enforcement [9:19] community and among federal prosecutors, at great risk to themselves. But because of the risk to [9:25] themselves, it's not a reliable leg. The federal judges are a reliable leg. No matter who appointed [9:30] them, they believe in something. And it's very different from the way that Donald Trump approaches [9:35] justice. [9:35] Someone made the point when you said that the first time, that a stool can't stand on one leg. I mean, [9:43] how long can we balance on one leg as a country? [9:46] We're going to have to balance for another two years. And I think we can do it after 250 years [9:52] of doing that. The genius of the founders' design is that the federal judiciary really does stand [9:58] apart. I've dealt with federal judges my whole career. There's a powerful culture that goes to [10:03] bedrock there. They care about their reputation and reality to be people of integrity and people [10:08] who wear a blindfold in deciding cases. And so it's a tough act to balance on one leg. But I believe [10:15] the federal judges can. And we'll get another leg, I believe, in November. There'll be two legs on [10:19] the stool after the coming wave, which I'm no expert, but I think that's coming. The American [10:24] people feel this and have had enough of this. [10:28] What is it like to see people who are your detractors, people like Jonathan Turley, defend you [10:34] and basically denigrate the case that's been brought against you? [10:39] Makes you a little nervous. [10:40] I was sort of like, how bad is it that Jonathan Turley is now a Comey defender? [10:47] But it's interesting. [10:48] Yeah, I don't know. And I'm not sure what he means by crawling inside one of my shelves or [10:51] whatever. But I think that it's important that people speak in an honest, open way about these [10:58] things. Again, I don't want to talk about my case. They're chasing John Brennan just because he has [11:02] spoken out and spoken the truth. I don't care where you are in the political spectrum. That should [11:06] offend you. And you ought to stand your butt up and speak about it. [11:10] Why do you think people like Lisa Monaco and Merrick Garland stay quiet? [11:14] I don't know. I mean, I can't look inside someone else's life. I've not walked in their shoes at all. [11:20] I think. [11:20] But you have, or Chris Ray. I mean, we've walked exactly in his shoes. Why, wouldn't it be helpful [11:24] if he was out there as Chris Christie's former attorney, as a Republican president's handpicked [11:31] replacement for you, defending the men and women of the bureau? [11:33] Look, I would like to see it, but I don't know how he thinks about it. [11:37] What I hope has not happened is that Donald Trump's aiming at people like me and Brennan [11:42] and Clapper and others has chilled those people, made them afraid to speak. [11:47] I hope we're not there because they strike me as people of character, [11:50] but I can't judge them individually. [11:53] Well, without judging them, would it be helpful to our democracy if people who have [11:57] held these jobs before were telling the American people how far from normal we are? [12:02] Yes. I think everybody ought to speak. Bill Barr ought to be on your show [12:05] talking about the dangers he sees and that he thought that person should never be near [12:10] the Oval Office again. And look what happened when we put him back. Everybody who has a voice [12:14] ought to be speaking up. But again, I can't balance what they see risked by speaking up. I don't know [12:19] what their family circumstances are or those sorts of things. I am going to continue to speak up because [12:24] I have grandchildren and someday they will be old enough to understand this time. And I want them [12:29] to know what pop did during this period of time. I hope everybody feels that way. [12:32] You said this won't be the last. Do you think they're going to indict you again? [12:37] Oh, I don't. Maybe. Yeah. I mean, I think it Donald Trump wakes up at three in the morning [12:41] thinking about me. I do not. The vice reverse does not happen. But I'm sure that if this case falls [12:47] apart, they'll come with something else. I'm going to have to deal with this. As I've told my family, [12:51] they're going to have to deal with this as long as Donald Trump is in the White House thinking [12:55] about me in the middle of the night. Have you heard of other jurisdictions looking at trying [12:59] to bring cases against you? I've read stuff in the media about it. I don't know whether it's accurate [13:03] or not. Do you think that the case that fell apart in the Eastern District of Virginia is something [13:10] that they're going to try to that was about what that was about testimony to Congress? Yes. Do you [13:16] think they're still pouring over your I mean, you testified before Congress dozens and dozens of times. [13:20] Is that something that you think they're they're still scrubbing and trying to find something? [13:24] I guess maybe. But the if there's a blessing, it's that the statute of limitations for alleged [13:29] false statements is five years. So they they had to hurry on the last one. They were running out of [13:34] time. I haven't testified in front of Congress since the fall of 2020. So they're probably pouring [13:40] over things. But there's not first of all, there are no false statements. And I don't think that's [13:45] going to be productive. But they'll continue working on it because that's what the boss wants. [13:49] I remember when you were on book tour, I think that might have been the first time I interviewed [13:55] you. But your first interview, I think, was with George Stephanopoulos. And you talked about [13:58] the first time you were around Trump's first team, which I think has turned over entirely with the [14:03] exception of Jared Kushner, reminded you of Cosa Nostra, of a mob family. That was such a better group [14:10] of people, for lack of any other word. I mean, that first term included people like Jim Mattis and [14:17] people like Jeff Sessions and people like John Kelly. I mean, what do you how would what word [14:23] would you use to describe this group? There doesn't appear to be anybody left who is willing [14:29] to stand for institutional imperatives, norms, things like the rule of law in the face of a desire [14:35] by the president. There were those people in the first term. Trump spotted it and wanted to make [14:40] sure it didn't happen again. Apparently it happened a little bit, at least with Pam Bondi. So she's [14:45] gone. What it tells me is that he has found the crew that he was looking for. What does that mean [14:52] for the country? It's bad. You never want time to fly, but it means it's going to be a very [14:58] difficult two years and whatever it is, two and a half years. Thank goodness for the elections this [15:03] fall. Thank goodness for the judiciary. But we're in for a rough ride, which really shouldn't shock [15:10] anyone who knew what Donald Trump was, who knew about January 6th, about the 2020 election lives. [15:15] All of this was in some ways predictable. And now we're going to have to live with it. I'm going to [15:18] have to live with it. When he calls you a dirty cop, what is he talking about? And how does that make [15:25] you feel? Honestly, it's crazy that I'm in a place where I'm 65 years old and I actually find it a [15:31] little bit humorous to have this obsession by this 80 year old man with me. I don't know. And I am an [15:39] honest person. I'm a person who was raised to stand up and speak out. I can't do any other. [15:45] He is, based on media reports, investigating a grand conspiracy. His press secretary, Caroline [15:53] Levitt, went to the podium of the White House briefing room, I think in the summer and described [15:58] it as this Carrie Matheson, like if Carrie Matheson wasn't smart, scheme to cook the intelligence. [16:06] And I don't know if it has Trump winning and then under, I don't know, but it involves you. [16:11] I mean, do you think you will be investigated as part of their grand conspiracy investigation [16:17] out of Florida? It's hard to say that is really red string on the basement crazy wall stuff. [16:23] And so it's hard to assess from a distance. I gather they found an 81 year old guy, Joe [16:28] DeGeneva, to come back to government for the first time since Duran Duran was on the charts [16:33] and lead an investigation. Again, they're trying to find people who will do that which [16:39] principled people will not do. And so it's anything's possible with this crowd.