James Comey’s indictment for threats against Trump based on more than just ‘86 47′ Instagram post, acting AG Blanche says
Former FBI Director James Comey has been indicted on charges of making threats against President Donald Trump, based on more than just an Instagram post spelling out '86 47' with seashells. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche stated that federal investigators relied on additional evidence not disclosed in the public indictment. Comey denies the charges, arguing the phrase refers to a hospitality industry term, not a threat of violence.
- ▪James Comey was indicted by a federal grand jury in the Eastern District of North Carolina over alleged threats against President Trump.
- ▪Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche said the indictment was based on more than just Comey's Instagram post featuring '86 47' spelled in seashells.
- ▪The Justice Department interprets '86 47' as a threat to kill the president, though Comey claims it refers to a common hospitality industry phrase.
- ▪Career FBI, Secret Service, and federal prosecutors were involved in the investigation leading to the indictment.
- ▪Comey has denied any wrongdoing and intends to fight the charges in court.
Opening excerpt (first ~120 words) tap to expand
Politics breaking James Comey’s indictment for threats against Trump based on more than just ‘86 47′ Instagram post, acting AG Blanche says By Anthony Blair Published May 3, 2026, 2:53 p.m. ET Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche has revealed he has more damning evidence of former FBI Director James Comey’s alleged threats against President Trump — and said it wasn’t just the viral “86 47” Instagram post that got him arrested again. “Rest assured that the career assistant United States attorneys in North Carolina, the career FBI agents, the career Secret Service agents that investigated this case didn’t just look at the Instagram post and walk away,” Blanche told Kristen Welker on NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Sunday.
…
Excerpt limited to ~120 words for fair-use compliance. The full article is at New York Post.
Discussion
0 commentsMore from New York Post
