Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche told Meet the Press the Comey indictment rests on far more than a single Instagram snapshot, and he said the grand jury gathered a broader body of evidence over nearly a year. The case turns on intent, the DOJ argues, and Blanche insists career prosecutors and agents built a file that goes well beyond a seaside photo that sparked an online firestorm.
Blanche pushed back hard against claims this is political theater and said prosecutors will lay out witnesses and documents in court to show what the grand jury found. He was clear that the investigation wasn’t a quick reaction to a tweet or a public outcry, and he stressed the role of career prosecutors rather than political appointees in deciding to bring charges.
“You prove intent like you always prove intent,” Blanche said. “You prove intent with witnesses. You prove intent with documents, with materials. … This is not just about a single Instagram post. This is about a body of evidence that the grand jury collected over the series of about 11 months.” Those words frame the department’s case and set expectations that the public won’t see the full picture until evidence is presented in court.
The numbers at the center of the controversy — “86” and “47” — have a colloquial meaning that dates back to restaurant slang for getting rid of something or someone. Prosecutors say that when “86” appeared alongside “47,” which they say referenced President Trump as the 47th president, the post crossed a line into a threatening context. Critics counter that the phrase is widely used on merchandise and social sites without criminal intent, but the DOJ says context and corroborating proof matter.
Blanche acknowledged that everyday mentions of “8647” — T-shirts, stickers, or novelty items — are not the target of prosecutors, making a distinction between casual online chatter and what his team believes amounts to a criminal threat. He emphasized that the Secret Service, FBI agents, and career assistant U.S. attorneys in North Carolina conducted a thorough review before the grand jury returned an indictment. That explanation is meant to blunt claims the prosecution was spawned by partisan pressure.
The indictment brought two federal charges in North Carolina, alleging that a Comey Instagram photo of seashells last year amounted to a threat to harm or kill the president. Online reaction was swift: users demanded answers, Comey removed the post and issued an apology, saying he had not realized the number’s violent association. He also voluntarily met with federal agents and spoke with the Secret Service after the post drew scrutiny.
The current case follows another prosecution effort against Comey alleging he lied to Congress, a charge that was tossed on procedural grounds and is now the subject of an appeal by the DOJ. That sequence has fed questions about whether prosecutors are being selective, and Comey’s legal team has already signaled plans to ask a judge to dismiss the latest indictment as vindictive and selective. Supporters of the DOJ response argue that appeals and court challenges are how the system sorts these disputes, not public accusations in the press.
Blanche was also asked whether President Trump’s public posts pressuring the department played a role, including a Truth Social message calling people “guilty as hell” and saying “JUSTICE MUST BE SERVED, NOW!!!” Blanche pointed out these were ongoing investigations before that post and urged patience while the criminal process runs its course. Republicans who back the Justice Department’s handling say that due process and the presentation of evidence will either validate the decision to indict or force prosecutors to rethink their case.
Legal scholars and free speech advocates have raised First Amendment concerns, arguing the charges may bump up against the Supreme Court’s “true threat” standard. The judge will have to balance those constitutional protections against the facts the government says it will produce. Comey’s arraignment is set for May 11 in Greenville, where the parties will begin the formal court process that will test how strong the DOJ’s evidentiary case really is.
Darnell Thompkins is a conservative opinion writer from Atlanta, GA, known for his insightful commentary on politics, culture, and community issues. With a passion for championing traditional values and personal responsibility, Darnell brings a thoughtful Southern perspective to the national conversation. His writing aims to inspire meaningful dialogue and advocate for policies that strengthen families and empower individuals.