James Comey Faces New Federal Charges Over Alleged Leak of National Defense Information to New York Times

Former FBI Director James Comey is facing a new federal prosecution after President Trump’s Justice Department accused him of illegally disclosing sensitive national defense information to a newspaper reporter while leading the FBI under President Barack Obama.

Federal prosecutors filed two criminal counts against Comey in Washington, D.C., alleging that he knowingly transmitted national defense information to an unauthorized individual and conspired with others to facilitate the disclosure.

The charges, made public Monday, October 26, represent the third criminal case pursued against Comey by the Trump administration since the president returned to the White House in January 2025.

According to federal court documents, the allegations center on events that occurred in October 2016, when Comey was serving as FBI director during the final weeks of the presidential election between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton.

Prosecutors allege that Comey directed another individual to communicate sensitive government information to New York Times reporter Charlie Savage.

The alleged disclosure concerned American electronic surveillance activities and followed a Reuters report involving Yahoo’s purported assistance with government email surveillance.

Federal authorities contend that the information was related to national defense and that Comey knew it was not authorized for public disclosure.

The first count alleges that Comey willfully communicated national defense information to someone who was not entitled to receive it.

The second count accuses him of conspiring with others to unlawfully transmit the same information.

The allegations involve provisions of the Espionage Act, a federal law governing the unauthorized handling and disclosure of certain national security information.

Prosecutors claim that Comey had reason to believe the information could potentially harm the United States or benefit a foreign government if improperly disclosed.

The Justice Department initially filed the case under seal on October 5, 2026, shortly before the expiration of the 10-year statute of limitations associated with the alleged conduct.

Unlike a conventional federal indictment, the charges were filed through a criminal information, a charging document submitted directly by prosecutors without first obtaining approval from a grand jury.

That distinction has become a central issue in the legal dispute.

Federal prosecutors maintain that filing the criminal information preserved their ability to pursue the case before the statutory deadline expired.

A Justice Department spokesperson defended the procedure, explaining that federal courts have previously recognized the use of criminal informations to preserve prosecution deadlines.

The department emphasized that the investigation remains ongoing and declined to provide additional details about the evidence.

Comey’s attorneys have challenged the filing, arguing that the government cannot use a criminal information in this manner to avoid the constitutional requirement for a grand jury indictment.

They maintain that the Justice Department failed to secure a valid indictment within the applicable limitations period.

The defense has asked the federal court to dismiss the charges.

Comey’s attorney, Patrick Fitzgerald, also argued that the underlying allegations had previously been examined by federal investigators without resulting in criminal charges.

Fitzgerald maintains that the former FBI director did not commit the offenses described in the government’s filing.

Comey responded publicly Monday with a video statement denying wrongdoing and criticizing the Justice Department’s latest prosecution.

“It would almost be funny if it weren’t such an appalling abuse of the Department of Justice,” Comey said.

He insisted that the repeated criminal cases have not changed his position.

“I’m still innocent,” Comey declared.

The former FBI director has accused the Trump administration of pursuing politically motivated prosecutions against him, an allegation the Justice Department has not accepted.

The latest charges reopen questions surrounding Comey’s conduct during his tenure at the FBI, particularly his handling of politically sensitive investigations and communications with the news media.

Comey served as FBI director from 2013 until President Trump dismissed him in May 2017.

His tenure became deeply controversial because of the bureau’s investigations involving Hillary Clinton’s private email server and allegations of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election.

Comey’s public statements about the Clinton investigation drew criticism from both political parties, particularly after he announced shortly before Election Day that investigators were reviewing additional emails.

Following Trump’s election victory, Comey remained FBI director until the president removed him from office.

His dismissal became a major political controversy as federal investigators continued examining allegations involving Russia and individuals associated with Trump’s 2016 campaign.

Comey subsequently became an outspoken critic of Trump, publishing books, granting television interviews and repeatedly questioning the president’s leadership.

The relationship between the two men has remained contentious throughout Trump’s political career.

The new case follows an earlier federal prosecution accusing Comey of making false statements to Congress and obstructing a congressional investigation.

That prosecution concerned Comey’s testimony about whether he had authorized FBI personnel to provide information to reporters.

A federal judge dismissed the case after determining that the prosecutor responsible for bringing the charges had been unlawfully appointed.

The dismissal addressed the legality of the prosecutor’s appointment rather than resolving the underlying allegations through a criminal trial.

The Justice Department subsequently pursued another case against Comey involving a social media post published in 2025.

That controversy began when Comey shared an Instagram photograph showing seashells arranged to spell the numbers “8647.”

Federal authorities interpreted the image as a potential threat against President Trump, with the number 86 sometimes used as slang for getting rid of someone and 47 referring to Trump’s position as the 47th president.

Comey denied intending to threaten the president and removed the photograph after the controversy erupted.

He maintained that he had not understood the arrangement as a call for violence.

The resulting criminal case remains pending in federal court in North Carolina.

The latest national defense information charges are separate from both earlier proceedings.

Unlike the social media case, the new allegations concern Comey’s official responsibilities as FBI director and his alleged involvement in providing sensitive government material to the press.

They also raise questions about whether senior federal law enforcement officials can face criminal liability for directing unauthorized disclosures of national security information.

Federal law establishes strict requirements for handling protected government information, particularly when disclosure could compromise intelligence operations or national security.

The Justice Department will have to establish that Comey’s alleged conduct satisfied the elements of the charged offenses.

The government must also overcome the defense’s procedural objections concerning the criminal information and statute of limitations.

Comey’s legal team is expected to argue that the prosecution is both legally defective and unsupported by the evidence.

The dispute arrives amid heightened scrutiny of the Justice Department’s investigations involving prominent figures who have publicly clashed with President Trump.

Comey’s defenders have questioned whether the repeated prosecutions reflect legitimate law enforcement priorities, while the administration has maintained that former officials are not exempt from federal criminal statutes.

Those competing claims will ultimately be tested through court proceedings rather than political statements.

The case also coincides with a separate legal development involving Comey’s daughter, Maurene Comey, a former federal prosecutor.

A federal judge recently ordered her reinstatement after determining that her dismissal from the U.S. Attorney’s Office had been unlawful.

That employment dispute is separate from the criminal allegations against her father.

For the Justice Department, the immediate challenge is securing a legally sustainable prosecution over conduct that allegedly occurred a decade ago.

The October 5 filing was designed to preserve the case before the limitations deadline, but the defense argues that the filing did not satisfy the legal requirements necessary to bring felony charges.

A federal judge must now determine whether the government can proceed and whether its charging procedure was valid.

No conviction has been entered against Comey in any of the three cases, and the latest allegations remain unproven.

The former FBI director continues to deny wrongdoing and has pledged to contest the charges.

With the latest filing, the Justice Department has once again placed Comey’s conduct under criminal scrutiny, this time focusing on allegations that sensitive national defense information was improperly provided to the press while he occupied one of the most powerful law enforcement positions in the federal government.