Left: Former FBI Director James Comey reacts to indictment by claiming his innocence (James Comey/Bluesky). Right: Vice President JD Vance appears on NBC”s Meet the Press on Sunday, Oct. 12, 2025 (Meet the Press/X).
On the same day that a former Donald Trump attorney turned rookie top prosecutor insisted on a sweeping protective order to ensure a “fair trial with impartial jurors,” Vice President JD Vance went on NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Sunday and stated, as fact, that former FBI Director James Comey “obviously lied under oath.”
Interim U.S. Attorney Lindsey Halligan, aided by North Carolina-based federal prosecutors Tyler Lemons and Gabriel Diaz, filed documents Sunday in support of a protective order, claiming the high-profile nature of the case and Comey’s remarks on social media defending his “innocence” made “restricting the use and dissemination of […] discovery” necessary, since both Comey and the prosecution “have an interest in a fair trial with impartial jurors[.]”
Enter Vance, who holds a Yale Law School degree, telling NBC’s Kristen Welker on Sunday morning that Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James “obviously” committed crimes, and that the proof the Trump administration is following the “facts and the law,” rather than the president’s directives, is that former Presidents Joe Biden and Barack Obama, and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton aren’t facing charges.
Welker: Is DOJ acting on orders from the president to prosecute his political opponents?
Vance: No, we’re driven by the law and the facts of the case— if you look at the fact that James Comey obviously lied under oath, Letitia James obviously committed mortgage fraud….
You… pic.twitter.com/hQ8p6hDnsE
— Acyn (@Acyn) October 12, 2025
“President Trump’s social media last month, calling for his Attorney General Pam Bondi to prosecute his political opponents James Comey, Letitia James and Adam Schiff, was actually meant to be a private message. Both Comey and James have now been indicted. Is the Department of Justice acting on orders from the president to prosecute his political opponents?” Welker asked.
“No, we’re driven by the law and the facts of the case,” Vance replied, claiming a “far-left” grand jury in a “far-left area” of Virginia indicted both Comey and James. “If you look at the fact that James Comey obviously lied under oath, Letitia James obviously committed mortgage fraud, what we’re doing is letting the law drive the prosecution decisions in the Department of Justice.”
Love true crime? Sign up for our newsletter, The Law&Crime Docket, to get the latest real-life crime stories delivered right to your inbox
“You know who we haven’t prosecuted? Joe Biden or Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton. Unlike Biden’s Department of Justice, Kristen, which actually went after Donald Trump in the midst of an election, we are not doing that. We are letting the law drive these decisions, that’s exactly as it should be,” Vance continued.
The vice president then dismissed concerns about Trump’s role in the prosecutions, saying he’s “allowed to have opinions about the law enforcement of the federal government.”
“Did somebody break the law? If so, we’re going to prosecute them,” Vance articulated the administration’s claimed stance.
Contrast this with Vance separately telling George Stephanopoulos of ABC’s “This Week” that there’s nothing more to see regarding Trump administration “border czar” Tom Homan’s alleged acceptance of a $50,000 cash bribe, as Director Kash Patel’s FBI wouldn’t move forward with an investigation.
If @jdvance has never seen the videotape of Tom Homan accepting a $50k bribe (as he says in this clip), how can he possible know that Tom Homan did not commit a crime? https://t.co/CjOV2xd1uH
— Daniel Goldman (@danielsgoldman) October 12, 2025
“Accepting $50,000 for doing what, George? I am not even sure I understand the question,” Vance said. “Is it illegal to take a payment for doing services? The FBI has not prosecuted him.”
In a Monday filing for U.S. District Judge Michael Nachmanoff’s review, Comey’s legal team has pushed back on the government’s proposal that the protective order be applied to “almost all of discovery,” rather than being “selectively designate[d].”
The defense further cast it as absurd that the former FBI director, also a licensed attorney, former high-ranking DOJ official and federal prosecutor, cannot now be “entrusted with some of the most sensitive and highly guarded information in the country” as he fights false statement and obstruction charges.
“To assert now, that he cannot be trusted with receiving discovery in his case controverts his long career of distinguished government service at the highest levels. Moreover, no one knows the facts of this case better than Mr. Comey himself,” the filing continued. “It places his defense at a severe and unnecessary disadvantage to insist that he be prohibited from possessing Protected Material to be able to review and refer to whenever necessary throughout preparation of his defense.”
