Former FBI Director James Comey has been indicted again, this time for an image he posted on social media. The image, which I wrote about here last May, was a series of shells arranged in the sand on a beach. The shells spelled out "86 47."
The charge stems from an incident nearly a year ago, when Mr. Comey, vacationing on the North Carolina coast, posted a photograph on social media showing seashells arranged to say “86 47,” combining the slang term “86” often used to mean dismiss or remove in reference to Mr. Trump, the country’s 47th president.
Members of the administration, as well as Mr. Trump’s family, declared that the meaning of “86” was to kill, and that the seashell message amounted to a threat to assassinate the president...
When Mr. Comey learned of the uproar, he deleted the post, saying that he did not know that it had a violent connotation and that he opposed violence of any kind. The Secret Service interviewed him by phone that evening, and Mr. Comey said he had no intent to cause the president harm. The next day, he sat for an in-person interview. The Justice Department eventually dropped the matter, but it was revived in recent months.
The original post included a caption read "Cool shell formation on my beach walk." As mentioned, members of Trump's family were quick to call this a call for Trump's assassination.
Just James Comey causally calling for my dad to be murdered.
— Donald Trump Jr. (@DonaldJTrumpJr) May 15, 2025
This is who the Dem-Media worships. Demented!!!! pic.twitter.com/4LUK6crHAT
I walked through the whole etymology of "86" in this post. The short version is that it arose in the 1930s as slang for being out of something. By the 1950s it was used more often to mean getting rid of something. And more recently, it also came to mean getting rid of something permanently, as in killing someone. But the older meaning of getting rid of something is still around so this can't be read solely as wanting someone dead. At a minimum it means "get rid of Trump."
It wasn't long before the current FBI director was involved.
We are aware of the recent social media post by former FBI Director James Comey, directed at President Trump. We are in communication with the Secret Service and Director Curran. Primary jurisdiction is with SS on these matters and we, the FBI, will provide all necessary support.
— FBI Director Kash Patel (@FBIDirectorKash) May 15, 2025
Comey deleted his post and claimed he had seen the shells already placed on the beach by someone else and thought they were a political message about Trump not a message about violence. Even the people who believed his intent wasn't violent, still thought the message was odd.
James Comey is posting cryptic messages online alluding to getting rid of President Trump.
— Sen. Marsha Blackburn (@MarshaBlackburn) May 15, 2025
Would he like to explain what he means by this given the assassination attempts on President Trump?
Take a look, @FBIDirectorKash @FBI. pic.twitter.com/NxnDM3xyti
One of the people who commented at the time was Charlie Kirk.
James Comey held himself up as a bastion of fairness and moral rectitude. Now, he makes cringe posts like a childless 50-year-old liberal woman on Facebook.
— Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk11) May 15, 2025
The entire country should be grateful Trump put this weirdo out to pasture. pic.twitter.com/4CHnBlhtxU
Here's my unvarnished take on this broken down into four points. As always, I'll add the caveat that I'm not an attorney, so take my comments about the case with a grain of salt.
One, I don't believe James Comey found these shells on the beach. He made this and he's lying about that.
Two, Comey is smart enough to know all the possible meanings of "86 47." He was fully aware of the possible reading of this as "kill Trump" when he posted it, but he also knows that's an implied but not required reading. In other words, he's playing a game here where he can say something really edgy but with plenty of plausible deniability in case it blows up. And since it did blow up, he denied meaning anything by it.
Three, his claim that this was just a political message makes no sense. What does "get rid of Trump" mean four months into his term? What is the lawful way to get rid of him last May? And what is the lawful justification for doing so? The obvious answer is that there isn't one. Which leads you right back to point two above. The only way this makes any sense is as an implied threat of some sort of extrajudicial action or wish fulfillment.
Four, because the threat was implied there is enough reasonable doubt to drive a truck through the case. Comey will continue his innocent act and the media will back him 100%. He will not be convicted of anything even if this goes to a trial.
Is Comey a lying creep with TDS. Yes. Was this a dog whistle for violence? Yes. Will he be convicted. No chance.
Last September, Comey was indicted by a grand jury on two other counts, false statement and obstruction of justice, connected to some testimony he gave before congress.
CONFIRMED: @Comey INDICTMENT
— Catherine Herridge (@C__Herridge) September 25, 2025
COUNT 1: FALSE STATEMENT
18 USC 1001
"...falsely stating to a US Senator during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing that he, JAMES B COMEY had not ‘authorized someone else at the FBI to be an anonymous source in news reports..’”
COUNT 2:… pic.twitter.com/tdsbMu1wu2
As you probably know, those charges were eventually dismissed.
A federal judge on Monday tossed out separate criminal charges against the former F.B.I. director James B. Comey and New York’s attorney general, Letitia James, saying the loyalist prosecutor installed by President Trump to bring the cases was put into her job unlawfully.
The twin rulings, by Judge Cameron McGowan Currie, were the most significant setback yet to the president’s efforts to force the criminal justice system to punish his perceived foes...
Judge Currie’s orders center on Mr. Trump’s unorthodox decision to appoint Ms. Halligan to her prosecutorial position in an interim capacity, replacing his previous pick, who was also serving in a temporary role. Within days after assuming her new post, Ms. Halligan rejected the advice of the career prosecutors in her new office and moved single-handedly to indict both Mr. Comey and Ms. James, two of the president’s most reviled targets.
In her rulings on Monday, Judge Currie said that it was unlawful to appoint two interim prosecutors in succession, and dismissed the charges against Mr. Comey and Ms. James without prejudice.
No response from Comey yet. I'll add it below if one pops up. Here's Jonathan Turley's take from a hit on Fox News.
🚨 JAMES COMEY IN LEGAL TROUBLE AGAIN
— Gunther Eagleman™ (@GuntherEagleman) April 28, 2026
Jonathan Turley just laid it out: The DOJ is circling back on James Comey over that infamous Instagram post with “86 47” shell art — widely seen as a veiled threat against President Trump.
Turley notes the photo alone is a weak case, but if… pic.twitter.com/ltfrvkXL85
