Legal Experts Say DOJ Has Evidence in Comey Indictment

Legal experts are pushing back on skepticism surrounding the indictment of former FBI Director James Comey. They argue the Department of Justice would not have brought the case without meeting key legal thresholds. "Lots of folks are saying the case is going nowhere, but, way too early to reach that conclusion," former Democratic U.S. Attorney John Fishwick, who served in Virginia during the Obama administration, said.

The indictment was brought last month in the Eastern District of North Carolina. It alleged Comey delivered interstate communications containing threats when he posted a photo on Instagram of seashells reading "8647" last year. Free speech advocates pushed back against the indictment.

They accused the DOJ of infringing on protected speech. Comey has been outspoken against the president since being fired as FBI director in 2017. "Comey is out for revenge against Trump and has publicly gone after Trump separately from the seashells," Fishwick said.

He added that the president also publicly said he perceived the message as a threat. " This high legal bar has fueled questions about whether the case can succeed. The recent threat environment has included three alleged assassination attempts against the president.

"You prove intent like you always prove intent," acting Attorney General Todd Blanche said on "Meet the Press" this weekend. "You prove intent with witnesses. You prove intent with documents, with materials. ... This is not just about a single Instagram post.

He said the indictment suggested there was underlying evidence. "I don't think the department would have secured the indictment without concrete evidence that Comey did knowingly and willfully threaten the president of the United States," Mizelle said.

Mizelle noted evidence could take many forms, such as nonpublic text messages or emails. " Mizelle asked. " The term "86" has been used as slang to get rid of someone or something. Prosecutors alleged that, paired with "47" — a reference to the president as the 47th president — Comey’s post amounted to a threat.

University law professor Jonathan Turley raised First Amendment concerns. He said if the case rested solely on the image of seashells forming "8647," it could face significant legal hurdles. Turley argued the image "is clearly protected speech" absent additional evidence.

The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression said "86" could actually mean impeachment. " Comey had quickly deleted the post. He said at the time that he did not realize that he had shared something ominous. " "I’m still not afraid, and I still believe in the independent federal judiciary, so let’s go," Comey said.

Comey's arraignment is set for May 11 in Greenville. His lawyer did not comment for this story.