Activist Judges Are Once Again Shielding Democrat Operatives From Accountabilit
The media is running victory laps over Judge Cameron McGowan Currie’s decision to dismiss indictments against Letitia James and James Comey — and they’re pretending it’s proof of innocence, vindication, or political overreach by Trump. That narrative is flat-out false. The only thing this decision proves is that a deeply politicised judicial class is still working overtime to protect its own.
Let’s get one thing clear from the outset: the evidence against Letitia James is overwhelming. Anyone without a political title and a blue jersey would already be in a courtroom facing fraud charges. Her misuse of state power, her selective enforcement, and her documented misconduct aren’t vague allegations — they’re on record. The indictments weren’t dismissed because she’s clean; they were stalled because a judge found a procedural technicality to hide behind. That’s not justice. That’s obstruction wearing a robe.
Instead of issuing a straightforward ruling — “the appointment was unconstitutional” — the judge used the classic political dodge: “may have lacked authority.” Every lawyer on the planet knows what that means. It’s not legal certainty. It’s not factual clarity. It’s a rhetorical smokescreen. When courts are confident, they speak in absolutes. When they’re protecting someone, they speak in maybes.
And Comey? Spare us the media’s sainthood act. This is the same man who:
- Lied to Congress,
- Leaked classified material,
- Knowingly presided over unlawful surveillance,
- And admitted under oath that critical FBI actions had “no legal basis.”
Democrats spent years insisting “no one is above the law.” But when the person facing charges is a loyal foot soldier of their own political machine, suddenly the law becomes optional, flexible, or “procedurally problematic.” The hypocrisy is so transparent it barely needs explanation.
And for the record: Donald Trump isn’t running these prosecutions. The Justice Department is finally doing what it refused to do for years — investigate misconduct from people who once assumed they were untouchable. The political class can’t handle that, so now every attempt at accountability is dressed up as authoritarianism. Funny how the Left had no problem weaponising the justice system when it targeted Trump. But now that the boomerang has swung back, they’re desperately screaming about “constitutional dangers.”
This ruling doesn’t clear Letitia James or James Comey.
It doesn’t debunk the charges.
It doesn’t resolve the evidence.
It merely pauses accountability long enough for the political spin cycle to kick in.
What we’re seeing is not justice — it’s a protection racket disguised as legal nuance. A judge used ambiguity to shield partisan actors from facing the same legal scrutiny they gleefully demanded for their opponents.
The American people aren’t blind. They see the double standard. They see the selective outrage. They see the judicial foot-dragging and the bureaucratic evasions. And they see exactly which side benefits every single time procedural “mistakes” magically appear.
If evidence didn’t matter when Democrats wanted Trump indicted four times on theories held together with sticky tape and political fantasy, then evidence doesn’t suddenly become irrelevant now that Democrats are the ones under the microscope.
The truth is simple:
These dismissals are nothing more than stalling tactics designed to protect political allies.
The cases can be refiled — and they should be — once the procedural smokescreen is cleared.
No amount of media spin is going to change the fact that Letitia James and James Comey still have to answer for what they’ve done. And the country is long past tired of watching activist judges run interference.
Leave a Reply