On the 29th of April 2026, James Comey, Ex-Director of the FBI, was indicted by a Federal Grand Jury in North Carolina for two separate offenses concerning threatening former President Donald Trump. The indictments stem from:
– Making a threat to the life or physical injury of a President with knowledge and with willful intent (18 U.S.C. § 871).
– Transmitting a threat in “interstate commerce”.
The maximum penalty for violation of these statutes can be up to 10 years; however, typical sentences for offenses like this are well below that level. As a result, an arrest warrant has been issued for Mr. Comey (through his attorney, Patrick Fitzgerald), who intends to contest the validity of the charges as a free speech issue.
The “8647” Post
An Instagram post that Comey made back in May 2025 is at the heart of this case. In the first picture, he shows what is known as a shell formation that spells out “8647” or “86 47” on the beach. The post was captioned with something like, “What an interesting shell formation to see on today’s beach walk”. The post has since been deleted.
So, what do Trump and his allies think that post meant? Based on their interpretation, there are two connotations to the numbers “8647” and “86 47”. First of all, “47” represents President Trump as the 47th president of the United States (the number represents his current term as president of the United States after winning the 2024 presidential election and being inaugurated in January 2025). Secondly, “86” is considered a term for people who are American/slang and originated in the kitchen/restaurants when referring to getting rid of or throwing out something. It has also been interpreted to have a more sinister meaning of “violent removal” or “assassination”. Trump has said that Comey had “full knowledge of the meanings” behind the post when he posted it. Comey’s posting led to an immediate outcry by many of Trump’s supporters, including Donald Trump Jr. and Kristi Noem (because of her position as Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security), and led to an investigation by both the Department of Homeland Security and the United States Secret Service at the time.
In response to these accusations against him, Comey claims that he or his wife spotted the shell formation on a beach walk, simply thought it was a cool shell formation, and posted it without knowing that anyone would interpret it violently. He has stated that he is against violence and deleted the post after realizing some individuals viewed it as a violent act. In a video he later made for Substack, he reiterated his innocence and conviction in a free and independent judiciary.
Background and Context
James Comey and Donald Trump have a long, contentious relationship:
– Comey was director of the FBI when he investigated the Trump campaign’s possible ties to Russia during the 2016 election.
– Trump dismissed Comey from the FBI in May 2017, an action Comey viewed as an obstruction of justice (criminal) while Trump viewed it as a valid action.
– The response to Comey’s dismissal led to the investigation conducted by Robert Mueller, who found evidence of Russia’s interference in the 2016 election; however, Mueller found no criminal conspiracy with Trump and/or his campaign.
Since taking office on January 20, 2025, Trump has directed his administration to pursue individuals he perceives as political adversaries with cases filed against “deep state” actors. Beginning with this indictment before the Department of Justice in the current presidential administration, Comey has been indicted twice:
– The first indictment (on September 28, 2025, in Virginia) included allegations of making false statements to Congress and obstruction of justice; this indictment was dismissed in November 2025 based upon issues with the alleged Prosecutor’s appointment.
The new indictment against Comey will be adjudicated in the Eastern District of North Carolina before Judge Louise Flanagan. The Prosecutor’s (acting under the express authorization of the Acting US Attorney General, Todd Blanche) argument is that “a reasonable recipient familiar with the surrounding circumstance, considering such context, would understand said published post to be a serious threat”.
Reactions and Controversy
Critics of the indictment (including many on the left and some legal observers): This looks like political retaliation or “weaponization” of the justice system. They argue the post is at most an ambiguous political speech or opposition (“86” Trump politically), protected by the First Amendment. Charging someone over seashells and slang risks chilling free expression, especially given Trump’s public calls to prosecute enemies like Comey, Adam Schiff, and others.
Supporters of the charges: Comey has been a vocal Trump critic for years. If the post was reasonably interpreted as inciting harm to the president (especially in a climate of political violence concerns), it crosses into criminal threat territory, which is not protected speech. “True threats” have a legal standard that considers context and how a reasonable person would perceive them.
The core legal fight will likely be over **intent** and whether the post qualifies as a “true threat” versus protected (if tasteless or provocative) political expression. Ambiguous social media posts have led to thorny cases before.
Broader Picture
This fits into a highly polarized environment where both sides accuse the other of abusing institutions. Left-leaning outlets (like Al Jazeera here, MSNBC, etc.) frame it as Trump punishing enemies via the DOJ. Right-leaning sources emphasize Comey’s history of antagonism toward Trump and argue the post was reckless or deliberately provocative given his prominence.
Comey is expected to appear in court and contest the charges vigorously. The outcome could have implications for how courts draw the line on online political speech involving public figures.
If you’d like me to dive deeper into the legal standards for threats, the history between Comey and Trump, reactions on X, or comparisons to similar cases, just let me know!