You cannot threaten the president of the United States.
In a republic where the line between political retribution and lawful prosecution is perpetually contested, a federal grand jury has indicted former FBI Director James Comey over an Instagram post bearing the numbers '86 47' arranged in seashells — an image Comey says he shared without understanding its violent connotations. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche insists the charge arose from nearly a year of independent investigation, not from any directive by President Trump, whose administration has now twice sought to prosecute its most prominent institutional adversary. The case asks an enduring question: when does the machinery of justice serve the law, and when does it serve the powerful?
- A federal grand jury in North Carolina has indicted James Comey on charges that a seashell-arranged Instagram post constituted a genuine threat to assassinate President Trump — a claim Comey flatly rejects, saying he never knew the numbers carried violent meaning.
- The indictment lands as the second DOJ prosecution attempt against Comey, following a September 2025 case that collapsed in November when a judge ruled the appointed prosecutor had no lawful authority to hold her position.
- Acting AG Todd Blanche pushed back forcefully against accusations of political motivation, insisting the White House played no role and that threatening a sitting president is a serious matter regardless of the medium — seashells included.
- Critics note the selective nature of the prosecution, pointing to conservative figures who posted similar imagery targeting former President Biden without facing charges — a tension Blanche deflected by saying each case turns on its own facts.
- With an arrest warrant issued and the case assigned to a federal judge in North Carolina, the prosecution now faces the twin tests of surviving legal challenge and convincing a jury that a deleted social media post crossed the threshold of criminal threat.
A federal grand jury in North Carolina indicted James Comey on Tuesday over a May 2025 Instagram post in which the numbers '86 47' appeared arranged in seashells. Prosecutors contend the image amounted to a serious threat against President Trump's life. Comey deleted the post after public backlash and maintained he had shared it as a political statement, unaware the numbers carried violent connotations. He responded to the indictment with a video proclaiming his innocence.
Asked on CBS whether Trump had directed the Justice Department to pursue the case, Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche was unequivocal: 'Of course not, absolutely, positively not.' He described the indictment as the product of nearly a year of independent grand jury investigation and argued that dismissing the case as merely about seashells missed the point — threatening a president, he said, is a grave matter that demands to be taken seriously.
Blanche also acknowledged that not every threat against Trump results in prosecution, framing each case as dependent on its specific circumstances. When pressed about conservative figures who had posted similar imagery targeting former President Biden, he offered the same answer: investigations stand on their own merits.
This is the second time the Justice Department has moved against Comey. A September 2025 indictment on false statements and obstruction charges was dismissed in November after a federal judge found that the prosecutor who secured it had been unlawfully appointed. The current case, assigned to Judge Louise Wood Flanagan in the Eastern District of North Carolina, will now face scrutiny both on legal procedure and on whether the government's reading of a deleted social media post can persuade a jury.
A federal grand jury in North Carolina returned an indictment against James Comey on Tuesday, charging him over an Instagram post from May 2025 that featured the numbers "86 47" arranged in seashells. Prosecutors allege the image constituted a serious threat to assassinate President Trump. Comey deleted the post after online backlash and said at the time he believed it was a political message and had not understood that those particular numbers carried violent associations.
When asked Wednesday morning on CBS whether Trump had directed the Justice Department to pursue the case, Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche flatly denied it. "Of course not, absolutely, positively not," he said. Blanche framed the indictment as the product of nearly a year of independent investigation that culminated in a grand jury's decision to charge Comey—not as a directive from the White House.
The indictment, signed by Assistant U.S. Attorney Matthew Petracca and assigned to Judge Louise Wood Flanagan in the Eastern District of North Carolina, argues that a reasonable person familiar with the context would read the seashell arrangement as expressing a genuine intent to harm the president. An arrest warrant was also issued. Comey responded by posting a video statement proclaiming his innocence.
Blanche's defense of the prosecution centered on the seriousness of threats against sitting presidents. He pushed back against what he saw as attempts to minimize the case as merely about seashells, arguing that such dismissals missed the fundamental point: threatening a president is a grave matter that cannot be tolerated. He also noted that threats against Trump occur regularly and are not all prosecuted, suggesting that the facts of each case determine whether charges follow. When pressed about conservative figures who had posted similar images about former President Joe Biden, Blanche said each investigation stands on its own merits and depends on the specific circumstances.
This indictment marks the second time the Justice Department has moved to prosecute Comey. In September, he was charged with making false statements and obstruction of justice related to Senate testimony he gave nearly five years earlier. That case was dismissed in November after a federal judge ruled that the top prosecutor in eastern Virginia who secured the indictment, Lindsey Halligan, had been unlawfully appointed to her position. The current prosecution will now test whether this second attempt can survive similar legal challenges and whether a jury will accept the government's interpretation of Comey's post.
Citas Notables
This is something that has been investigated for nearly a year now, and the results of that investigation is that a grand jury returned an indictment.— Todd Blanche, Acting Attorney General
Comey said he thought the post was a political message and didn't realize some folks associate those numbers with violence.— James Comey, former FBI Director
La Conversación del Hearth Otra perspectiva de la historia
How does Blanche explain the timing here—why now, after Comey deleted the post months ago?
He doesn't, really. He just says it's been under investigation for nearly a year. The implication is that the investigation took time, that grand juries work at their own pace. But you're right to notice the gap between May and now.
And the "86 47" numbers—is there actual evidence Comey knew what they meant?
That's the crux of it. Comey says he didn't realize. The indictment says a reasonable person would have. Those are two different claims about the same image, and a jury will have to decide which one holds up.
Blanche keeps saying "look at the indictment." What's he really doing there?
He's trying to shift the conversation away from politics and toward the document itself. He's saying: don't listen to me, don't listen to Trump critics—read what the grand jury found. It's a rhetorical move that assumes the indictment speaks for itself.
But doesn't the fact that this is the second prosecution attempt matter?
It matters a lot. The first one collapsed because the prosecutor wasn't legally appointed. That raises a real question about whether the Justice Department is pursuing Comey with unusual persistence, or whether it's just being thorough. Blanche would say thorough. Critics would say something else.
What about those conservative posts about Biden that Blanche dismissed?
That's where the political question won't go away, no matter what Blanche says. If similar posts about Biden weren't prosecuted, why is this one? His answer—that each case is different—is technically true but doesn't satisfy the underlying concern.