Grand jury transcripts have been made available from the Justice Department's case against former FBI Director James Comey, and MSNBC legal analyst Lisa Rubin noted that just 60% of grand jurors in Virginia agreed to indict him — a far cry from the unanimous number they'll need to secure a conviction.

Of the 23 people on the grand jury, just 14 agreed to indict. Twelve were needed to proceed with the case.

There is an adage that a grand jury could "indict a ham sandwich." This is because the target is not allowed to present their own case in defense before a grand jury. So, the joke is that the grand jury could manage to come up with an indictment even in the most absurd situations. The defendant is only able to defend themselves at the full trial.

It's an issue that journalist James Surowiecki also addressed in response to Rubin's note.

"In a grand jury proceeding, the prosecution gets to present its case with no opportunity for the prospective defendant to offer any counterargument. And the grand jury still rejected one of the three counts, and voted only 14-9 to indict on the other two. Sign of a v. weak case," he wrote on X.

Others noted that the low number of those willing to indict could speak to a rough future for the case.

"So only 14 of 23 jurors thought there was enough to indict after hearing a one-sided presentation? Not promising for unanimous verdict of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt after vigorous defense at trial," Ethics and Public Policy Center senior fellow Ed Whelan wrote on X.

"This case won’t even make it to a jury. Rule 29 permits judge to grant motion to acquit for lack of evidence," commented University of Michigan Law School professor Barbara McQuade.

Journalist, author and columnist for the Georgia Recorder, Jay Booman, wrote, "So a bare majority of the grand jury was willing to indict Comey, after hearing nothing from the defendant or from his defense counsel. A far cry from the unanimous vote that would be needed to convict. That validates the argument of career prosecutors that it's a bad case."

Legal analyst Jeffrey Evan Gold agreed, "That's incredibly low. A transcript of the grand jury proceeding might show very pointed questions asked by grand jurors before any vote."