The Justice Department has indicted former FBI Director James Comey over an Instagram post featuring seashells that formed the phrase "86 47" [1].
The case marks a second indictment for Comey [2]. It raises significant questions regarding the legal threshold for what constitutes a threat against a sitting president and the potential politicization of the federal judiciary.
Republican strategist Sean Spicer and Democratic strategist Chuck Rocha discussed the legal proceedings during a C-SPAN broadcast on Friday [1]. Prosecutors said the specific arrangement of shells in the post served as a threat against President Trump [1]. The indictment was first reported on April 28, 2026 [3].
Legal experts and political figures have reacted with skepticism to the charges. Former Attorney General Eric Holder said the case is "one of the dumbest indictments I think I've ever heard of" [4]. Similarly, Elie Honig said the indictment is "bogus" [5].
Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) also criticized the move, saying that Attorney General Merrick Garland, referred to as "Blanche" in the context of the indictment, has lost all shreds of integrity [6].
The dispute centers on whether the phrase "86 47" is a coded threat or a benign social media post. The term "86" is common slang for removing or ejecting something, while "47" refers to the president's numerical order in U.S. history. The Justice Department said the imagery was an intentional threat [1].
“"One of the dumbest indictments I think I've ever heard of."”
This indictment represents an escalation in the legal conflict between the Justice Department and former intelligence officials. By targeting a social media post involving abstract imagery, the government is testing the boundaries of the 'true threat' doctrine, which protects speech unless it is a serious expression of an intent to commit an unlawful act of violence.
