Todd Blanche’s Misdirection on the Comey Indictment

Recorded May 4th en route from Harrisburg to Nashville, this episode addresses recent media appearances by Todd Blanche, who has suggested that undisclosed, grand-jury-protected evidence may justify the indictment of James Comey.This analysis explains why that argument is a classic misdirection.The law is straightforward: an indictment must stand on its own. It must articulate the government’s theory of the case, identify the statute allegedly violated, and specify the conduct that constitutes the offense. That requirement is not optional—it is a core component of due process and fundamental fairness.Here, the indictment reportedly rests on a single act: a social media post containing “8647” . Blanche’s suggestion that additional, undisclosed evidence exists does not cure a defective theory of prosecution. Grand jury secrecy under Rule 6 governs disclosure—it does not permit the government to obscure or defer the legal basis of the charge itself.This episode breaks down:* The legal function of an indictment as notice to the defendant* The limits of grand jury secrecy as a justification in public commentary* Why “there’s more evidence” is not a substitute for a viable charging theory* How this line of argument shifts attention away from whether the alleged conduct is criminal at allBottom line: if the conduct described in the indictment does not constitute a crime, no amount of undisclosed evidence fixes that problem. Calling attention to hidden evidence is not a legal defense of the indictment—it is a rhetorical diversion.Subscribe for precise, doctrine-driven legal analysis that cuts through advocacy and focuses on what the law actually requires. Get full access to The Rule of Law Brief at natecharles.substack.com/subscribe