If I may, and I realize you are not responding to or asking the question of me. The McCabe issue is complicated to explain, but here goes:
1. The Comey quote in the Indictment -- "falsely stating . . . that he, JAMES B. COMEY JR., had not 'authorized someone else at the FBO to be an anonymous source in news reports'" -- is itself false. Comey never said the quoted words (above) that the Indictment attributes to him. Hallirans filed a deficient Indictment.
2. The quoted words were actually spoken by Senator Rafael "Ted" Cruz in a lengthy, heavily premised question at the 2020 Congressional hearing. Here is the relevant part of the transcript (quoted words in Indictment bolded):
Senator Cruz: On May 3rd, 2017, in this committee, Chairman Grassley asked you point blank, "Have you ever been an anonymous source in news reports about matters relating to the Trump investigation or the Clinton investigation?" You responded under oath, "Never." He then asked you, "Have you ever authorized someone else at the FBI to be an anonymous source in news reports about the Trump investigation or the Clinton administration?" You responded again under oath, "No." Now, as you know, Mr. McCabe, who works for you, has publicly and repeatedly stated that he leaked information to the Wall Street Journal and that you were directly aware of it and that you directly authorized it. Now, what Mr. McCabe is saying and what you testified to this committee cannot both be true. One or the other is false. Who's telling the truth?
Mr. Comey: (01:52:43) I can only speak to my testimony. I stand by the testimony you summarized that I gave in May of 2017.
Senator Cruz: (01:52:50) So your testimony is you've never authorized anyone to leak? And Mr. McCabe, if he says contrary, is not telling the truth, is that correct?
Mr. Comey: (01:52:58) Again, I'm not going to characterize Andy's testimony, but mine is the same today.
3. So you can see from the transcript that the question (which is actually Senator Cruz recasting Senator Grassley's similar question from 2017) that Comey is alleged to have answered falsely is directed to or premised on Andy McCabe's leak.
4. McCabe was Comey's second in command at FBI or something.
5. In 2016, McCabe leaked to the Wall Street Journal that the FBI was investigating the Clinton Foundation.
6. In 2018, the FBI investigated the McCabe leak and wrote a Report. Here it is:
7. The Report found that McCabe leaked the Clinton investigation to the WSJ, but that he never sought nor got authorization from Comey to do the leak, and that he only told Comey about the leak after the fact.
8. So the question by Cruz actually has a false premise in it -- "as you know, Mr. McCabe, who works for you, has publicly and repeatedly stated that he leaked information to the Wall Street Journal . . . and that you directly authorized it." Comey never authorized McCabe to leak, so it raises the question of whether one can even provide a false answer to a question with a false premise in it. Sound legally impossible to me.
9. But anyway, one would reasonably assume that the thread-bare, sketchy Indictment is related to the Cruz question about McCabe, and that McCabe he is Person 3. What else could it be about?
10. Reasonable people are apparently wrong. The media is now reporting that sources at the DOJ are saying Person 3 is not McCabe but rather Daniel Richman. Hallirans strikes again. Nothing in the Indictment remotely supports anything like this, in fact, the opposite.
11. Richman is the guy that Comey gave his notes from his weirdo meetings with Trump to. That's an entirely new can of worms and analysis.
This was discussed more in depth on pages 2003-2006 of this thread.