Etchings on the walls near the entrance of the Department of Justice building in Washington, D.C., on July 19, 2025, seemed to foreshadow the turmoil brewing inside. In a year already marked by political tension, the firing of Michael Ben-Ari, a top national security prosecutor, and the federal indictment of former FBI Director James Comey have set off a firestorm of controversy around the independence of American law enforcement and the growing influence of social media on the justice system.
According to CNN, Michael Ben-Ari, who led the National Security Section in the Alexandria, Virginia office, was dismissed on Wednesday, October 1, 2025. The firing followed a social media post by right-wing activist Julie Kelly, who accused Ben-Ari of being "a significant part of the internal resistance against bringing charges against Comey." However, a source familiar with the case told CNN that Ben-Ari had no involvement in the Comey prosecution. His abrupt removal is just the latest in a series of purges at the Department of Justice after prominent MAGA social media figures targeted various prosecutors and staff.
The Comey case itself is equally fraught. Former FBI Director James Comey now faces a two-count federal indictment, alleging he made a false statement to Congress and obstructed justice. The charges stem from his 2020 congressional testimony, which, according to legal experts cited by Fox News Digital, contains "convoluted" language that could make the prosecution's job difficult. Comey, who was fired from his post on May 9, 2017, after his handling of the Clinton email probe, has assembled a formidable defense team expected to challenge the indictment on several fronts.
The prosecution is being led by Lindsey Halligan, an interim U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia. Halligan, a longtime Trump ally and former insurance lawyer with no prosecutorial experience, was appointed after President Donald Trump fired the previous nominee and his predecessor, Erik Siebert, a 15-year veteran of the office. According to CNN, Halligan's appointment came just before the five-year statute of limitations on Comey's alleged offenses expired on September 30, 2025.
Attorney General Pam Bondi, meanwhile, publicly urged the Department of Justice to focus on prosecuting political opponents, including Comey. This call was echoed and amplified by pro-Trump voices on social media, who have increasingly played a role in shaping personnel decisions and prosecutorial targets within the DOJ. In fact, a lawsuit filed last month by three former FBI agents cited pro-Trump social media posts as a direct factor in their own dismissals, highlighting the growing political influence of online activism on law enforcement agencies.
Legal experts are already predicting a tough road ahead for the prosecution. Barb McQuade, a former U.S. Attorney from Michigan, told Fox News Digital that Comey could argue selective prosecution, pointing to President Trump's public comments as evidence of improper motive. "To prevail on a selective prosecution claim, the defendant must show not only that the prosecution was motivated by an improper purpose, but also that other similarly situated individuals were treated differently," McQuade explained. She noted it would be "remarkably easy to demonstrate the first factor," given Trump's open calls for Comey's indictment, but the second factor—proving others were treated differently—would be much harder.
Jim Trusty, a former DOJ prosecutor who once worked on Trump’s defense team, urged patience, telling Fox News that the indictment is still in an early stage and the specific allegations remain unclear. However, he dismissed the idea that Trump is weaponizing the DOJ, arguing, "Lawfare was certainly used as a weapon to go after Trump, but it also protected people, and so you can also look at this as four years of love from the Biden administration kept Comey out of the crosshairs." Trusty suggested that Comey’s indictment could be seen as "tit for tat," or perhaps just overdue justice.
Other critics, however, see the indictment as dangerously weak and politically motivated. Former DOJ official Harry Litman, host of "Talking Feds," told Fox News Digital, "If we can just get through the midterms and give the House of Representatives the power to subpoena all of these jokers on Capitol Hill, grill them and then impeach Trump again … all of the evidence of the crime that Donald Trump just committed will be laid out for public inspection." Litman also warned that if reports are correct that career prosecutors advised Halligan against charging Comey, she faces the "possibility of serious professional sanctions." At this point, no DOJ prosecutors have joined Halligan on the case, raising further questions about the strength and legitimacy of the prosecution.
The indictment itself hinges on Comey’s 2020 congressional testimony, specifically an exchange with Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, who referenced a question originally asked by Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, in 2017 about whether Comey authorized a leak to the media. According to McQuade, Cruz slightly misquoted Grassley, adding another layer of complexity to the case. "Because the prosecution must show that Comey knowingly and willfully made a false statement, that messy record may be a fatal flaw," McQuade said.
If the court permits, Comey's legal team may seek access to Department of Justice internal deliberation records regarding the decision to prosecute. Former U.S. Attorney John Fishwick told Fox News Digital, "The biggest potential fallout for DOJ will be if the judge permits the Comey legal team to get under the hood of the internal deliberations of DOJ to prosecute or not prosecute Comey. The Comey team wants to argue this prosecution is just about politics and revenge, but they will need as much evidence as possible to buttress this claim as DOJ will counter the grand jury indicted Comey, not DOJ."
Meanwhile, the firing of Michael Ben-Ari is being viewed by many as a warning to other career prosecutors and DOJ staff who may be seen as obstacles to politically motivated prosecutions. As CNN notes, the episode is part of a broader pattern of purges at the Department of Justice, driven by the amplification of grievances and accusations on social media. Analysts warn that this trend threatens the objectivity of investigations and the independence of law enforcement, as political actors exert increasing pressure on the agencies responsible for upholding the law.
Public trust in the justice system, already fragile, now hangs in the balance. Calls for transparency and the independence of investigators have become central themes in the ongoing debate about the future of American law enforcement. With the Comey case set to move forward and the DOJ under unprecedented scrutiny, the coming months are likely to test the resilience of the nation’s legal institutions like never before.
