DOJ Indicts James Comey on Threat Charges

The U.S. Department of Justice indicted former FBI Director James Comey this week on two felony counts of threatening the president and transmitting such a threat in interstate commerce. president.

According to the indictment, Comey knowingly and willfully made a threat to take the life of or inflict bodily harm upon the president. The government stated that a reasonable recipient familiar with the circumstances would interpret the post as a serious expression of intent to harm.

The term '86' originates from 1930s soda-counter culture and means to eject, dismiss, or remove someone, per Merriam-Webster. The dictionary notes that while it can imply violence, that connotation is recent and not standard in its definition. Several individuals, including former Rep.

) and Jack Posobiec, have used the term '86' regarding political opponents without facing similar legal action.

' He issued an apology and agreed to an interview with the Secret Service. Law enforcement reportedly followed and surveilled Comey after the post as he returned home from a North Carolina vacation. FBI Director Kash Patel announced the indictment, noting that the investigation had been ongoing for 9 to 11 months.

School of Law professor Eugene Volokh stated that the prosecution is unjustified and likely to be dismissed on First Amendment grounds. He referenced the 2023 Supreme Court ruling in Counterman v. Colorado, which requires the government to show the defendant consciously disregarded a substantial risk that communications would be viewed as threatening.

The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression described the idea that the seashell photo conveyed serious intent to harm as ridiculous and called the attempt unconstitutional. This is the second prosecution of Comey by the administration in less than a year.

In September 2025, prosecutors in the Eastern District of Virginia charged him with lying to Congress, shortly before the statute of limitations expired.

In the post, Trump mentioned Comey, Sen. ), and New York Attorney General Letitia James, stating, 'Nothing is being done... ), OVER NOTHING. Carissa Byrne Hessick, a professor at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Law, told Reason that Comey has a strong case for discovery in a vindictive prosecution claim, which could embarrass the administration.

She noted that Supreme Court precedents recognize rights against selective and vindictive prosecution based on animus, though proving motivations is challenging. Hessick explained that defendants typically need evidence to proceed to discovery, but public demands for prosecution by the president may strengthen Comey's position.