Your Honor, members of the jury:
The defendant, James Brien Comey Jr., is charged under 18 U.S.C. §§ 871(a) and 875(c) with knowingly and willfully making and transmitting a threat to kill or inflict bodily harm on the President of the United States.
On May 15, 2025, in this district, he posted an Instagram photo of seashells arranged on a North Carolina beach spelling "8647," captioned a "cool shell formation." He later deleted it.
A reasonable person familiar with the circumstances would read this as a serious threat to President Trump — the 47th President. "86" is established slang for eliminate or get rid of; "47" needs no explanation. Combined, the message is unambiguous to those who speak that language: remove the 47th President permanently.
This was not innocent beach art by a private citizen. It was posted by a former FBI Director who spent years at the center of power and knows exactly how symbols and timing function as signals. The defendant has a long public record of hostility toward this President. Context is everything in threat analysis. The Supreme Court has never held that true threats are protected simply because they are wrapped in metaphor.
The defendant claims he merely photographed random shells and did not understand the violent connotation. The evidence refutes both claims. He deleted the post and issued a follow-up acknowledging its political meaning. Consciousness of guilt is plain. A grand jury, after reviewing the full record, found probable cause.
This office brings cases when facts and law align — not on feelings or politics. Title 18 protects the President from threats delivered by any means, including social media or arranged seashells. No exception exists for former FBI directors.
The defense will cite Watts v. United States and claim protected political speech. Watts involved crude, conditional venting at a rally. This was specific, curated, and mass-disseminated. They will claim selective prosecution. They ignore that few who post "8647" possess the defendant's history, platform, and institutional credibility. Speaker identity and context matter under Virginia v. Black and Counterman v. Colorado.
This case is not about seashells. It is about whether a former FBI Director may signal the elimination of a sitting President through coded language and then claim artistic innocence. The answer is no. The law applies equally — or it applies to no one.
The United States will prove the defendant acted knowingly and willfully. We ask you to return verdicts of guilty on both counts.
Respectfully submitted,
Office of the United States Attorney
Eastern District of North Carolina
The defendant, James Brien Comey Jr., is charged under 18 U.S.C. §§ 871(a) and 875(c) with knowingly and willfully making and transmitting a threat to kill or inflict bodily harm on the President of the United States.
On May 15, 2025, in this district, he posted an Instagram photo of seashells arranged on a North Carolina beach spelling "8647," captioned a "cool shell formation." He later deleted it.
A reasonable person familiar with the circumstances would read this as a serious threat to President Trump — the 47th President. "86" is established slang for eliminate or get rid of; "47" needs no explanation. Combined, the message is unambiguous to those who speak that language: remove the 47th President permanently.
This was not innocent beach art by a private citizen. It was posted by a former FBI Director who spent years at the center of power and knows exactly how symbols and timing function as signals. The defendant has a long public record of hostility toward this President. Context is everything in threat analysis. The Supreme Court has never held that true threats are protected simply because they are wrapped in metaphor.
The defendant claims he merely photographed random shells and did not understand the violent connotation. The evidence refutes both claims. He deleted the post and issued a follow-up acknowledging its political meaning. Consciousness of guilt is plain. A grand jury, after reviewing the full record, found probable cause.
This office brings cases when facts and law align — not on feelings or politics. Title 18 protects the President from threats delivered by any means, including social media or arranged seashells. No exception exists for former FBI directors.
The defense will cite Watts v. United States and claim protected political speech. Watts involved crude, conditional venting at a rally. This was specific, curated, and mass-disseminated. They will claim selective prosecution. They ignore that few who post "8647" possess the defendant's history, platform, and institutional credibility. Speaker identity and context matter under Virginia v. Black and Counterman v. Colorado.
This case is not about seashells. It is about whether a former FBI Director may signal the elimination of a sitting President through coded language and then claim artistic innocence. The answer is no. The law applies equally — or it applies to no one.
The United States will prove the defendant acted knowingly and willfully. We ask you to return verdicts of guilty on both counts.
Respectfully submitted,
Office of the United States Attorney
Eastern District of North Carolina
🔥28💯23❤6
🔻 Two things happened in the last 24 hours that were not supposed to happen simultaneously.
The first: Trump walked into the Situation Room at 2:14 PM. The meeting lasted exactly 2 hours. He walked out without announcing a deal. The media said "no decision was made."
That is a lie. The decision was made before he sat down.
The deal was leaked ON PURPOSE. The terms published were not the real terms. They were the terms meant for Iran to reject. The actual agreement was signed 6 hours earlier through a backchannel that does not appear on any official schedule.
The second: Pam Bondi testified behind closed doors about the Epstein files. She admitted "redaction errors." Dozens of names were exposed. She blamed two men below her and refused to answer 14 questions.
What she did not say — and what three people in that room already know — is that the "errors" were not errors.
THE NAMES WERE RELEASED INTENTIONALLY.
Not to expose victims. To send a message to 11 people who believed their names would never surface. Three of them are currently serving in European governments. One has not been seen publicly since April 19.
The war you see is not the war being fought. The deal you were shown is not the deal that was signed. The names you think were "accidentally" leaked were placed there with surgical precision.
There is a list. It is not long. But every name on it has a deadline now.
June 15 is not a release date. It is a surrender date.
Those who come forward before that date will be offered terms. Those who do not will be named in a format that cannot be redacted, retracted, or denied.
THE EXTRACTION PHASE HAS BEGUN.
The first: Trump walked into the Situation Room at 2:14 PM. The meeting lasted exactly 2 hours. He walked out without announcing a deal. The media said "no decision was made."
That is a lie. The decision was made before he sat down.
The deal was leaked ON PURPOSE. The terms published were not the real terms. They were the terms meant for Iran to reject. The actual agreement was signed 6 hours earlier through a backchannel that does not appear on any official schedule.
The second: Pam Bondi testified behind closed doors about the Epstein files. She admitted "redaction errors." Dozens of names were exposed. She blamed two men below her and refused to answer 14 questions.
What she did not say — and what three people in that room already know — is that the "errors" were not errors.
THE NAMES WERE RELEASED INTENTIONALLY.
Not to expose victims. To send a message to 11 people who believed their names would never surface. Three of them are currently serving in European governments. One has not been seen publicly since April 19.
The war you see is not the war being fought. The deal you were shown is not the deal that was signed. The names you think were "accidentally" leaked were placed there with surgical precision.
There is a list. It is not long. But every name on it has a deadline now.
June 15 is not a release date. It is a surrender date.
Those who come forward before that date will be offered terms. Those who do not will be named in a format that cannot be redacted, retracted, or denied.
THE EXTRACTION PHASE HAS BEGUN.
👏36❤12🔥9💩3👎2