You can’t make this stuff up – Both Comey’s and Brennan’s attorneys were caught lying to the courts.
Comey:
In early November, Paul Sperry shared some observations on the documents that Comey provided to the courts in his perjury case. One observation is shocking. According to Sperry, when presenting evidence in a motion to the court as part of his perjury defense, James Comey’s legal team altered two words in a transcript of his 2020 Senate testimony to make it seem as if Sen. Ted Cruz asked Comey a key question he didn’t actually ask him during the hearing. YOU CAN’T MAKE THIS STUFF UP.
NEW: In presenting evidence in a motion to the court as part of its perjury defense, James Comey’s legal team altered two words in a transcript of his 2020 Senate testimony to make it seem as if Sen. Ted Cruz asked Comey a key question he didnt actually ask him during the hearing
— Paul Sperry (@paulsperry_) November 11, 2025
The following question was asked of Duck.ai about what happened:
Can a defendant alter words in a transcript he presents as evidence in a trial?
The answer is:
No, a defendant cannot alter words in a transcript that is presented as evidence in a trial. Transcripts are official records that accurately capture what was said during legal proceedings. Altering them would be considered fraud and could lead to serious legal consequences, including charges of contempt of court or tampering with evidence.
Not so good for Comey.
In their defense, Comey and his friend claimed they did nothing wrong, but they hid their identities in doing it.
James Comey and Dan Richman claim they weren’t doing anything wrong when they leaked sensitive info to their NY Times handmaiden Michael Schmidt, yet they both used aliases in their emails and texts –with Comey posing as “Reinhold Niebuhr” and Richman posing as “Michael Garcia.”
— Paul Sperry (@paulsperry_) November 10, 2025
Brennan:
This week, the Conservative Treehouse caught John Brennan’s attorneys lying to the court.
You have to go deep in the weeds to see it, but if you understand the details of the events, the information being revealed by Brennan’s lawyers is the opposite of helpful to his case. As an example, there is a citation included in a footnote of the December 22, 2025, [fn #20 page 6] letter that links to a March 31, 2022, letter sent to John Durham.
Here’s page 6 of the 2025 letter.
Compare the underlined section to the 2022 letter sent to John Durham.
In 2025, Brennan is telling the Florida court the Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) conclusion was confirmed by Special Counsel Robert Mueller in a “very serious review.” However, in 2022 Brennan told John Durham that Robert Mueller never interviewed him or offered an assessment of the ICA; Mueller just regurgitated it.
So, which is it?
"Lying" is the first thing democrats do. "Cheating" and "stealing" become easier after lying.