Michael Barbaro

These two cases got to the point where they could be at the very front end of the system so easily tossed out and tossed out so quickly.

We've got the Comey case and the James case.

One involves leaking.

The other involves mortgages.

Just briefly remind us about the legal basis for both these cases.

Which made him enemy number one for Trump forever.

Right.

Trump cycles through as many prosecutors basically as it takes until he can get someone, a loyal aide, Halligan, it turns out, who would bring a charge against Comey.

So Halligan ends up being two for two.

And it's not so much that she's evaluating what look like super strong legal cases against Comey or James.

It's that she very much wants to fulfill the president's desire for an indictment.

That seems to be more or less the conventional wisdom from the minute these cases are brought.

However, a grand jury in both cases indicts.

Right.

They're making an argument that really gets to the heart of both cases.

Basically, does it have any merit?

Is it simply an act of revenge?

And if it's just an act of revenge, isn't that illegal?

Well, just describe this hearing.

And just explain why that would be a big deal.