The Daily Beast Podcast

Episode: Trump's Witchhunt is About to Meet This Reckoning
Host: Hugh Docherty (in for Joanna Coles)
Guest: Shan Wu, former federal prosecutor, defense attorney, and columnist
Date: October 5, 2025

Episode Overview

This episode unpacks former President Donald Trump’s pursuit of legal action against ex-FBI Director James Comey, discussing the recent grand jury indictment and what it means for both legal precedent and the future of American justice. Guest Shan Wu provides expert insight into the strengths and, crucially, the fatal flaws in the case against Comey, and highlights the broader implications for the integrity of the Justice Department and the rule of law in the era of Trump.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Setting the Scene: Trump v. Comey (01:36–04:20)

• James Comey, fired as FBI Director by Trump in 2017, has been a persistent target of Trump’s ire.
• Recently, a grand jury in the Eastern District of Virginia indicted Comey on charges of making false statements to Congress and obstruction.
• The episode interrogates whether this is a legitimate prosecution or a politically motivated vendetta.

2. Strength of the Case & Legal Maneuvering (04:20–06:31)

• Likelihood of Jail Time:
  Shan Wu states a conviction is "pretty unlikely," and even if convicted, jail time would be minimal (04:20).
• The Real Impact:
  The process itself—public shaming, financial/legal stress—is seen as “the triumph for Trump” regardless of actual conviction (04:20).
• Cost Factor:
  Defending against such charges can easily exceed hundreds of thousands of dollars, especially when involving major law firms and a high-profile defense team (05:31).

3. Message Beyond Comey: Political Targeting (06:04–07:33)

• The stress and cost of prosecution serve as a deterrent and warning to any of Trump’s opponents: “This is a message to loads of other people” (06:04).
• Notably, career prosecutors at the Department of Justice (DOJ) demurred, lacking evidence for indictment, and were subsequently dismissed or forced out.
  Quote:
  "The career people, people of experience, are saying this is a no go, there's not any evidence there. So the case starts out in an extremely weak, flawed kind of position." (06:31 – Shan Wu)

4. How Federal Prosecutions Work—And Where This Case Breaks Norms (07:33–10:19)

• Indictment Standard:
  Legally, only “probable cause” is needed for an indictment, but the DOJ's policy requires confidence in proving the case “beyond a reasonable doubt” at trial.
• Grand Jury Anomaly:
  Unusually, one of three proposed charges was rejected by the grand jury—a strong sign of weakness. Quote:
  "In my 11 years of DOJ, I only saw one declination… Those two things would tell a prosecutor, this is a very poor case." (09:48 – Shan Wu)

5. Political Interference and Breakdown of DOJ Guardrails (10:19–13:24)

• Career prosecutors—non-political staff—refused to bring the case, leaving Trump loyalists like Lindsey Halligan (with “zero experience”) to prosecute.
• The replacement of seasoned prosecutors with political appointees demonstrates the “rotting” of impartial DOJ processes.

6. Next Steps in the Legal Process (12:09–13:44)

• Arraignment Scheduled:
  Expected early October; Comey will plead not guilty.
• Fast Track:
  The Eastern District of Virginia is nicknamed the “Rocket Docket”; proceedings will move swiftly and pretrial motions (potentially to dismiss) will be filed quickly (12:22).

7. Could This Case Reach the Supreme Court? (13:24–15:13)

• It’s rare for a criminal case to reach the Supreme Court pre-trial, barring extraordinary circumstances (e.g., immunity defenses).
• The likeliest defense: selective prosecution, but these claims are historically difficult to prove—except here, where Trump’s public demands provide unusually rich evidence.

Memorable Quotes & Moments

Selective Prosecution Uniqueness:
"That's what makes it such an unusually strong case for selective prosecution—you have all these public statements for them to go with, and that's really kind of unheard of."
— Shan Wu (15:13)

On Publicity and Prejudice:
"The argument will be this kind of statement from like the world's biggest bully pulpit is going to taint all of the jury pool."
— Shan Wu (18:40)

On the DOJ's Breakdown:
"He’s just taken away leaders that might stand up to him and he's managed... at this point, one can safely say that the DOJ really functions as his personal attorneys. He's got some of his personal attorneys serving in the top positions and they do what he wants to do. And that is a terrible situation for the country. It's completely against the concept of an impartial justice system."
— Shan Wu (31:52)

On Why Everyone Should Care:
"The test here is if that bully was in charge of deciding your fate in terms of charging you with a crime, how would you want to be treated? What protections would you want? That's why it's important. No matter how you feel about Comey or anybody else, you have to be concerned. If they have no rights just because a person in power doesn't like them, that can easily happen to any of us."
— Shan Wu (34:24)

On Restoring the Justice System:
"Right now, that particular piece of the foundation, the integrity of the federal Justice Department, that's broken. It's just not working. So it's completely dependent kind of on the judiciary right now. And that's not the way it's supposed to work. I think it can be brought back. I mean, we're only talking, you know, four years here. It can be changed. But what can't be changed... is all the damage that's done, not just to the institution, but the actual people, the lack of proper prosecution priorities... That's damage that you can't really repair."
— Shan Wu (35:48)

Important Segment Timestamps

• [01:36] Shan Wu joins, introduces fatal flaws in case against Comey
• [04:20] Likelihood of Comey’s conviction; real consequences are stress/cost
• [05:31] Expense of hiring top legal defense
• [06:31] DOJ career prosecutors replaced after refusing to advance case
• [07:33] Federal prosecution standards; grand jury process failure
• [12:22] Next legal steps: arraignment and rocket-docket pacing
• [15:13] Unusual potential for a successful selective prosecution argument
• [18:40] Pretrial publicity and its dangers
• [22:14] Challenges for prosecution in making the case persuasive to jurors
• [25:48] Possibility of Senator Ted Cruz as trial witness
• [27:02] Questioning whether U.S. justice can withstand such unprecedented political interference
• [31:52] The cost to America’s justice system, comparisons to Watergate, and lasting damage to DOJ credibility
• [34:24] Why ordinary people should care about the fairness of high-profile prosecutions
• [35:48] Possibility of repairing institutional damage

Tone and Language

The exchange balances sobering analysis with flashes of wit, especially in light of the gravity of the subject matter. Wu is analytical, precise, and candid, while Docherty provides humour and maintains a conversational, accessible style throughout.

Conclusion

The episode delivers a clear warning: Trump’s campaign to criminally pursue political enemies, like James Comey, threatens the norms and functionality of America’s justice system. Even in a likely weak case, the process itself delivers damaging consequences—financially, reputationally, and systemically. Wu emphasizes that while the system’s foundation may be repairable, the pain inflicted on individuals and public trust may prove lasting unless guardrails are urgently restored. The conversation ends on a guarded note of hope—that reform is possible, but vigilance is critical.