Trump says James Comey knew ‘full well’ that ’86’ is ‘mob term for kill,’ and he also apparently ‘lied to FBI about this’

The legal battle between President Trump and former FBI Director James Comey has reached a new boiling point, with the president making aggressive claims about the intent behind a controversial social media post. President Trump publicly accused Comey of knowing “full well” that the phrase “86” serves as a “mob term for kill him,” The Hill reported.

The charges center on a photograph Comey posted last year to Instagram. The image depicted seashells arranged on a beach to spell out “86 47.” Given that Trump is the 47th president of the United States, the Department of Justice alleges that the post was a clear, willful threat against his life. In his indictment, the government argues that a reasonable person familiar with the context would interpret the arrangement as a serious expression of intent to cause harm.

Trump didn’t hold back in his assessment of the situation on Wednesday. In a post on Truth Social, he wrote, “‘86’ is a mob term for ‘kill him.’ They say 86 him! 86 47 means ‘kill President Trump.’” He went on to label the former FBI director as a “Dirty Cop” and one of the worst individuals he has encountered. He even suggested that Comey might have lied to the FBI regarding his knowledge of the term, stating, “Didn’t he also lie to the FBI about this??? I think so!”

This latest escalation follows the unsealing of an indictment brought by the Department of Justice, which charges Comey with two counts of threatening the president

For his part, Comey has maintained his innocence throughout the proceedings. He made his first court appearance on Wednesday and took to Substack to address the public directly. In a video clip, he appeared defiant, telling his audience, “I’m still innocent, I’m still not afraid, and I still believe in the independent federal judiciary. So let’s go.”

Comey has previously stated that when he posted the photo of the seashells, he viewed it as a political message and did not realize it could be interpreted as a call for violence. He noted that he took the post down immediately once he was informed of the potential implication, emphasizing that he opposes violence of any kind. His attorney, Patrick Fitzgerald, confirmed that the former director “vigorously denies” the charges and intends to contest them in court to vindicate both Comey and the First Amendment.

The timing of this indictment is particularly sensitive, arriving in the wake of a third assassination attempt on President Trump. This most recent incident occurred on Saturday night at the Washington Hilton during the White House Correspondents’ Association dinner.

According to a manifesto obtained by police, the suspect intended to target both the president and other administration officials. Trump has survived previous attempts as well, including an incident at a campaign rally in Butler, Pennsylvania, where he was grazed by a bullet, and another event in West Palm Beach, Florida, where a gunman was later convicted and sentenced to life in prison.

When asked by CNN’s Kaitlan Collins in the Oval Office if he believed posts like the one from Comey endangered his life, Trump responded, “Probably, I don’t know, you know, based on what I’m seeing out there, yeah.” He added that people like Comey have created “tremendous danger” for politicians and others.

The Department of Justice, however, is standing firm on its decision to prosecute. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche stated at a Tuesday press conference that threatening the life of the president will never be tolerated. He noted that the department has charged dozens of similar cases over the past year, insisting that they take every single threat seriously.

Despite the government’s stance, the indictment has faced pushback from various observers who question the strength of the case. Rep. Troy Nehls, a vocal supporter of the president, told reporters at the Capitol that the charges felt like “a stretch.”

Furthermore, law professor Jonathan Turley wrote an op-ed for Fox News arguing that the indictment was “facially unconstitutional absent some unknown new facts.” Rep. Jamie Raskin, the ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, also weighed in, questioning why the Justice Department is pursuing this case while remaining silent on other instances of aggressive rhetoric directed at political figures.

This isn’t the first time Comey has faced legal scrutiny from the Department of Justice. He previously dealt with false statements and obstruction charges related to his 2020 testimony before Congress regarding FBI leaks. That case was eventually dismissed due to the unlawful appointment of the prosecutor involved.

As this new legal chapter unfolds, Comey remains resolute, telling his supporters in his Substack video, “Well, they’re back.” He added that while he expects more challenges ahead, he remains committed to his position, telling his audience to “keep the faith.”