Perjury prosecutors evidence Comey, Conduit Dan Richman
Comey conduit Dan Richman New York Times
Comey Richman New York Times discussion
Comey Richman perjury prosecutors evidence
Comey Richman New York Times email case

BREAKING: Perjury prosecutors have evidence Comey “conduit” Dan Richman reached out to New York Times’ Michael Schmidt to discuss the Hillary email case-related intel right after meeting with Comey in his 7th Fl Hoover office in Jan 2017 when Richman was still employed at the FBI

• Check out these discounted items on Amazon

— Paul Sperry (@paulsperry_) September 30, 2025

In a shocking development, perjury prosecutors have uncovered evidence that Dan Richman, a close associate of former FBI Director James Comey, reached out to New York Times reporter Michael Schmidt to discuss classified information related to the Hillary Clinton email investigation. This communication allegedly took place shortly after Richman met with Comey in his 7th floor office at the Hoover Building in January 2017. What makes this revelation even more startling is the fact that Richman was still employed at the FBI at the time of this alleged communication.

The implications of this revelation are significant and could potentially have far-reaching consequences. If proven true, it would suggest that there was a deliberate effort to leak sensitive information to the media in order to shape the narrative surrounding the Clinton email investigation. This could call into question the integrity and impartiality of the FBI’s handling of the case, as well as raise serious concerns about potential breaches of protocol and ethics within the agency.

The fact that Richman, who was a trusted confidant of Comey, allegedly acted as a “conduit” between the former FBI director and a prominent journalist raises troubling questions about the extent of collusion and coordination between the bureau and the media. It also raises concerns about the possible politicization of the FBI and its investigative processes, as well as the potential weaponization of sensitive information for political purposes.

The timing of this alleged communication is particularly noteworthy, as it occurred shortly after Comey’s controversial decision to reopen the investigation into Clinton’s emails just days before the 2016 presidential election. This decision had a significant impact on the outcome of the election and was met with intense scrutiny and criticism from both sides of the political spectrum.

The fact that Richman reached out to a specific journalist at a major news outlet like the New York Times suggests a calculated effort to strategically leak information in a way that would maximize its impact and reach. This raises serious concerns about the integrity of the media and its role in reporting on sensitive national security matters, as well as the potential for journalists to be used as pawns in political games.

Overall, this latest development in the ongoing saga of the Clinton email investigation raises serious questions about the actions of key figures within the FBI and their potential collusion with the media. It also underscores the importance of holding accountable those who abuse their positions of power and trust for personal or political gain. As the investigation continues to unfold, it will be crucial to uncover the full extent of any wrongdoing and ensure that those responsible are held to account.

In a recent development that has grabbed headlines, perjury prosecutors have uncovered evidence that former FBI Director James Comey’s “conduit,” Dan Richman, reached out to New York Times reporter Michael Schmidt to discuss sensitive information related to the Hillary Clinton email case. This revelation comes right after Richman met with Comey in his 7th-floor office at the Hoover Building in January 2017. At that time, Richman was still employed at the FBI.

The implications of this communication between Richman and Schmidt have raised serious questions about potential collusion or improper sharing of confidential information. The timing of the discussion, immediately following Richman’s meeting with Comey, suggests a coordinated effort to leak information to the media. This has fueled speculation about the motives behind such actions and whether they were intended to influence public perception or interfere with the investigation.

It is crucial to note that the sharing of sensitive information by individuals with ties to law enforcement agencies can have far-reaching consequences. In this case, the involvement of a former FBI employee like Richman in communicating with a journalist about a high-profile case raises concerns about the integrity of the investigative process. The potential breach of protocol and ethical standards cannot be ignored, especially when it involves individuals in positions of authority and trust.

The role of the media in reporting on matters of national importance is essential for transparency and accountability. However, when information is shared inappropriately or with ulterior motives, it undermines the credibility of the press and the institutions they cover. The relationship between law enforcement officials and journalists should be based on mutual respect for the rule of law and the responsibilities that come with their respective roles.

As this story continues to unfold, it is essential for investigators and the public to scrutinize the actions of those involved and hold them accountable for any wrongdoing. The integrity of our justice system and the trust of the American people depend on upholding ethical standards and ensuring that information is handled responsibly. Transparency and adherence to established procedures are paramount in maintaining public confidence in the institutions that serve and protect our society.

In conclusion, the recent revelations about Dan Richman’s communication with Michael Schmidt highlight the importance of upholding ethical standards and maintaining the integrity of our justice system. The potential implications of such actions on the investigative process and public trust cannot be understated. As this story develops, it is crucial for all parties involved to be transparent and cooperative in addressing any concerns that may arise. Only through accountability and adherence to established protocols can we ensure that justice is served and the truth is upheld.

Perjury investigation, Comey conduit, Dan Richman, New York Times, Michael Schmidt, Hillary email case, Intel discussion, 7th Fl Hoover office, Jan 2017, FBI employment, Prosecutorial evidence, Legal case, Witness testimony, Email scandal, Government corruption, Media contact, Classified information, Criminal investigation, Legal proceedings, National security concern