One overarching challenge in prosecuting McCabe is his own history. McCabe is not a career criminal or the head of a violent street gang. He is a career FBI agent with no criminal history and a long career in public service who would argue that he would never intentionally lie because he knew the consequences of doing so could be severe. He already lost his job and his pension as a result of this investigation, and he has two children at home. Jurors would be hesitant to send him to prison for lying to a colleague, particularly given that no one was concretely harmed by his actions.
There also are problems with the evidence against McCabe. The first time McCabe allegedly lied was during a one-on-one conversation with Comey that was not recorded or witnessed by anyone else. It’s always a dicey proposition to expect a jury to convict someone when there is a “he said / he said” situation.
Also, while Comey is a credible witness, the president of the United States and his allies have engaged in a systemic campaign to smear him as “Lyin’ Comey.” McCabe’s legal team could argue that Comey is lying to advance his own agenda by portraying him as a Washington, D.C., operator who plays the media by leaking, writing books and making his case on television. Given the smear campaign against Comey, it’s easy to see why at least some jurors might doubt his credibility.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member