What’s in a number? Specifically what’s in the number “86”?
Recently former FBI Director James Comey posted the above picture on Instagram with the caption “Cool shell formation on my beach walk.”
This elicited a furious backlash by supporters of Donald Trump, our 47th president, who claimed that “8647” is a numerical code for “Kill Trump”.
Comey then published this follow-up statement on Instagram: “I posted earlier a picture of some shells I saw today on a beach walk, which I assumed were a political message. I didn’t realize some folks associate those numbers with violence. It never occurred to me but I oppose violence of any kind so I took the post down.”
Since then Comey’s defenders have argued that “86” can mean many things including, but not limited to, “remove” and “throw out”. But, to the contrary, Trump’s supporters insist that Comey was calling for Trump’s death and have cited examples from the underworld of what it means to “86” someone.
As for the criminal interpretation of “86ing” someone, here’s a bloody two minute clip from the movie L.A. Confidential in which the term is used at the very end.
It seems that “8647” has become a numerical Rorschach test for identifying an individual’s political persuasion.
Friday Comey was questioned by the Secret Service about his Instagram post.
I doubt the investigation will end there, and I also doubt that he will be charged criminally. Given the ambiguity of “86”, it would be difficult, if not impossible, to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Comey was calling for Trump’s death.
Which is not to say that Comey is off the hook and in the clear. Far from it.
To see what I’m talking about, take a look at my latest article which was recently published by The American Spectator.
James Comey’s Riddle in the Sand – The American Spectator | USA News and Politics
On April 11, 2025, Aliakbar Mohammed Amin was arrested in Georgia for allegedly threatening to kill Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard and her family. He was charged with transmitting interstate threats after sending text messages targeting Gabbard, her husband, President Trump, and the White House.
The messages included statements such as “You and your family are going to die soon” and “Prepare to die, you, Tulsi, and everyone you hold dear. America will burn.” Federal agents searched his social media and found similar threats as well as images of a firearm pointed at photos of Gabbard and her husband. A firearm was recovered from his home during a search. He is in custody pending trial and faces up to five years in prison if convicted.
Amin has been charged pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 875(c) which provides, in relevant part, the following:
(c) Whoever transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication containing any threat to kidnap any person or any threat to injure the person of another, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.
This statute prohibits threats sent through interstate systems such as text messages, emails, or social media. However, under the relevant caselaw, it must be proven that the defendant transmitted the communication with the purpose of issuing a threat or with knowledge or reckless disregard that it would be interpreted as a threat. Also, the transmitted communication must convey a serious expression of intent to commit unlawful violence as distinguished from hyperbole, political speech, or idle talk.
Which brings us to May 15, 2025, when — like an empty-headed, attention-seeking 13 year old — former FBI Director James Comey posted a photograph on Instagram showing seashells arranged on the beach to form the numbers “8647.” Comey captioned the picture as follows: “Cool shell formation on my beach walk.” (RELATED: James Comey’s Insane ‘86 47’ Threat)
The post was deleted shortly thereafter due to backlash from those who interpreted it as a threat against Donald Trump, the 47th president, with “86” being slang for “get rid of” or “kill.” Comey then issued a follow-up statement on Instagram saying, “I posted earlier a picture of some shells I saw today on a beach walk, which I assumed were a political message. I didn’t realize some folks associate those numbers with violence. It never occurred to me but I oppose violence of any kind so I took the post down.”
Of course, Comey’s claim that he was unaware that “86” can be a reference to killing stretches credulity to the breaking point.
Or, as President Trump commented to Bret Baier on Fox News, “He knew exactly what that meant. A child knows what that meant.” And then Trump described Comey as a “dirty cop” whose experience as FBI director from 2013 to 2017 (when Trump fired him) made his claim of ignorance completely implausible.
Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem has publicly condemned Comey’s Instagram post. In a post on X, Noem stated, “Disgraced former FBI Director James Comey just called for the assassination of @POTUS Trump. DHS and Secret Service is investigating this threat and will respond appropriately.”
In her later appearance on Fox News, Noem emphasized the sensitivity and danger of Comey’s post, given the two recent assassination attempts on Trump in 2024. She suggested that Comey’s post was a deliberate and “highly concerning” provocation warranting a strong response.
Now, in addition to Sec. 875(c) (discussed above), there are three other statutes that come into play. 18 U.S.C. Sec. 871(a) prohibits knowingly and willingly transmitting a threat to kill or harm the president. 18 U.S.C. Sec. 373 makes it a federal crime to “solicit, command, induce, or otherwise endeavor to persuade another person to engage in a federal crime of violence.” (Emphasis added) And 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1111 prohibits the murder of the president.
In short, the necessary criminal statutes are in place, Comey’s actions are not in dispute, and the feds are investigating. The only open question is whether Comey’s actions constitute a true threat under the statutes and relevant case law.
So, is he guilty? That’s an open question that will have to be resolved by the Secret Service, the Department of Homeland Security, and the Department of Justice. But here’s one thing that is crystal clear:
Thanks to his gobsmackingly ill-advised actions, the benighted James Comey has handed on a silver platter, to a hostile law enforcement establishment under the direction of a president whom he tried to destroy, an ample investigative predicate pursuant to which his life is about to be torn apart and thoroughly turned inside out.
To determine whether Comey was truly seeking to cause harm to President Trump, law enforcement has complete justification to use every investigative tool at its disposal. In addition to agents interviewing Comey, he will undoubtedly be subpoenaed to appear before a federal grand jury to explain himself under oath. At each stage, he will be at risk of being criminally charged for false statements to agents as well as perjury and false swearing before the grand jury.
In addition, his emails, text messages, social media, home, and office will be searched for electronic and physical evidence pertaining to his Instagram post and his feelings and intentions regarding Trump. Similarly, his family, friends, business associates, neighbors, and others who have had contact with Comey will doubtless be interrogated and, if appropriate, questioned before the grand jury regarding Comey’s possible animus, utterances, associations, and actions.
Who knows what will be discovered and what secrets — criminal or not — will be made public?
Comey may be criminally charged and/or convicted. But, even if he isn’t, he is about to undergo the absolute and ruinously expensive hell that he and his agents have put so many others through. For, in our system of justice, even at the investigative phase, the process is the punishment.
But, in Comey’s case, the suffering will be all the more intense since, as the saying goes, self-inflicted wounds are the most painful. And, for a self-adoring narcissist like James Comey, knowing that he did this to himself will only add to the anguish.
Heh.
George Parry is a former federal and state prosecutor.
3 Comments
Leave your reply.