Justice Department Charges Comey Over a 2016 Times Leak, and His Lawyers Say Time Has Run Out

Former FBI Director James Comey is facing federal charges again. Court papers unsealed Monday, October 27, show the Justice Department has charged him over an alleged October 2016 leak of national defense information to The New York Times. Reports describe two counts. The case was filed on October 5 and kept under seal until this week.

The timing matters. The conduct is alleged to have taken place on or about October 5, 2016, though Yahoo News places it on October 4 and 5. The charges were filed on October 5, 2026, at or near the ten-year mark. Comey's lawyers say the statute of limitations bars the case, and they have already moved to dismiss. Which date applies is part of what a judge will have to sort out.

The form of the case is also notable. Prosecutors brought the charges as a criminal information, not a grand jury indictment. Nothing in the available reporting explains why. This site has not independently reviewed the charging document, and details below come from published accounts of it.

What prosecutors allege

The Federalist reported that the charges fall under the Espionage Act and that prosecutors allege Comey authorized then-FBI General Counsel James Baker to give the Times classified details. The Daily Wire, relaying NBC News reporting, said the charges involve transmitting national defense information and a conspiracy to do so. Published accounts do not line up on how the counts break down, and that stays unsettled until the filing itself is widely examined.

The Times story ran in the fall of 2016 and concerned Yahoo's assistance with U.S. government email surveillance. According to The Federalist, the scanning was done to comply with a secret FISA court order aimed at a state-sponsored terrorist group, and Yahoo was barred from disclosing that order.

Per NBC's account of the filing, written by Special Assistant U.S. Attorney Dustin Farahnak, Comey directed staff to speak with Times reporter Charlie Savage about a Reuters article from the day before. The filing says Comey "sought to correct misinformation which had appeared in the press." The Saudi Gazette described the filing as just three pages with few details.

An alleged leak with a paper trail

The allegation is not entirely new. A February 25, 2020 FBI closing document, quoted by the Substack newsletter The Reactionary, reportedly states that Baker believed Comey had authorized the disclosure, with the word relayed through then-Chief of Staff James Rybicki. The same document reportedly recommended against prosecuting either Baker or Comey. This site has not seen that memo, and the Substack is a partisan outlet. The claim that Comey personally approved the alleged leak rests on Baker's understanding of what he was told.

The Federalist and Yahoo News both reported that investigators earlier recommended against charges. Comey's lawyers argue that the matter was investigated twice with no charges recommended. The Saudi Gazette reported that John Durham and the Justice Department inspector general previously examined Comey's conduct, and that Durham found no evidence to support prosecuting him.

The third case against Comey

The Daily Wire counts this as the third case brought against the man President Trump fired in May 2017. The first, brought in September 2025, was dismissed. Comey's attorney, Patrick Fitzgerald, has said that in that case the department used someone who was not actually a U.S. attorney to seek an indictment that was never shown to the grand jury. The Federalist describes Comey as accused of threatening President Trump over his "86 47" post, and the Saudi Gazette reported that case is ongoing. The Saudi Gazette also reported that Comey denies wrongdoing and calls the case political.

In an Instagram video, Yahoo News reported, Comey said, "I'm still innocent. I'm still not afraid of these people." In the same video he said, "Well they're back again." The reporting available does not give the date of the video.

The Federalist, which calls Comey a "disgraced former FBI director," dismisses the politicization claims made by Comey and his allies. But the questions his lawyers are raising are procedural ones a judge will have to answer on the record: whether a filing made at the ten-year line is timely, and whether an alleged leak that investigators reviewed in 2020 can be pursued now.

What comes next

A judge will rule on the motion to dismiss on statute-of-limitations grounds. The court, the assigned judge and any hearing date had not been confirmed in the reporting available, nor had the Justice Department's formal response to the motion.