Justice department's shellshock saga: hearings on comey, hearn, and a bureaucratic black hole

The Department of Justice is currently embroiled in a series of increasingly bizarre legal maneuvers, culminating in a frankly absurd spectacle of taxpayer-funded investigations and crumbling prosecutions.

A shell for comey: gravano’s unhelpful testimony

The latest absurdity involves James Comey and a photograph of seashells – specifically, a composition reading “86 47.” The defense team, in a move bordering on the theatrical, presented evidence citing Kash Patel’s FBI’s obsessive pursuit of this ludicrous charge. It’s a level of bureaucratic exertion rarely matched, and frankly, baffling. The key witness? Salvatore “The Boss” Gravano, a former capo of the Gambino crime family, who, astonishingly, couldn’t recall ever discussing the term “86” with Comey or even hearing it connected to the case. Gravano’s claim – that all law enforcement would recognize “86” as a code for murder, but that a gangster would never use it – is a masterclass in obfuscation, and a damning indictment of the sheer waste of resources involved.

Hearn’s reflecting pool debacle

Meanwhile, the prosecution of Davey Hearn for damaging the Reflecting Pool is dissolving faster than a cheap liner. A National Park Service official testified that the pool’s damage predated Hearn’s alleged actions, and that any repairs would have been necessary regardless. The defense brilliantly highlighted pre-existing structural issues – a million gallons of water leaking weekly, compromised expansion joints, and a gaping rip in the liner – effectively dismantling the prosecution’s case. It’s a classic example of grand jury manipulation, a hallmark of this DOJ’s recent missteps.

A pattern of misconduct

This isn't an isolated incident. Last year, federal grand jurors in Chicago rejected indictments against at least three individuals accused of assaulting federal agents during the “Midway Blitz” operation. The Chicago notification rule, implemented in May, followed by revelations of serious misconduct in the “Broadview Six” case – leading a judge to declare her trust irreparably broken – paints a disturbing picture. Andrew Boutros’ office, predictably, declined to comment, offering only a vague expression of gratitude for the court’s efforts to improve local rules.

The sheer incompetence on display is almost comical, a pale echo of the Nixon administration’s reliance on shadowy operatives. It’s a chilling reminder that the presumption of regularity, the bedrock of our legal system, is under sustained assault. And frankly, it’s a national disgrace.