Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche is making it clear that the Department of Justice’s case against former FBI Director James Comey is not about a single cryptic Instagram post of seashells. Appearing on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” Blanche emphasized that the indictment handed down by a grand jury involves far more than what appears on Comey’s social media page.
Host Kristen Welker pressed Blanche about the post, which included the phrase “86 47” alongside a photo of seashells.
Prosecutors allege this post could be interpreted as a coded threat against President Trump, referring to an intent to “86,” or eliminate, the 47th president.
Blanche made it clear this was not some rushed or overly simplistic case.
Here’s What They’re Not Telling You About Your Retirement
“Well, every case requires an investigation,” Blanche said.
“And what you just showed is one part of that investigation. Rest assured that the career assistant United States attorneys in North Carolina, the career FBI agents, the career Secret Service agents that investigated this case, didn’t just look at the Instagram post and walk away.”
Comey, who has long been portrayed by mainstream outlets as a martyr of the anti-Trump resistance, is now facing serious legal jeopardy from an extended federal probe.
Just as media figures rushed to defend Comey, Welker pushed back, questioning how the government could prove intent when Comey himself denied understanding that the post could be seen as violent. Blanche was unmoved.
This Could Be the Most Important Video Gun Owners Watch All Year
“You prove intent like you always prove intent. You prove intent with witnesses, you prove intent with documents, with materials,” he said, reinforcing that the indictment stems from an extensive body of evidence, not a single social media upload.
That assertion is particularly notable, given how the left and its allies in the press have portrayed this case as a persecution of a Trump critic.
Blanche reminded viewers that an 11-month investigation does not happen over a misunderstanding.
“If the only facts that existed was the posting of the Instagram, obviously that wouldn’t have taken 11 months,” he said.
He further explained that the public will hear every detail in court. “It’s called a trial,” Blanche said pointedly, a line that seemed intended to deflate the mounting outrage campaign being drummed up by liberal commentators.
“At the trial, a public trial, that will be open to the public, everybody in this country will know exactly what evidence the government has against Mr. Comey.”
For years, Comey has been the darling of the anti-Trump media class, weaponizing his FBI reputation to lecture the country about “truth” and “integrity.”
But those same networks now wring their hands as his story takes a new turn.
Despite Welker’s attempt to trivialize the matter, Blanche drew a clear distinction between Comey’s case and ordinary chatter online.
When Welker asked about people selling products online featuring the same “86 47” phrase, Blanche calmly dismissed the comparison.
“Of course not,” he said.
“That phrase is used constantly. There are constantly men and women who choose to make threatening statements against President Trump. Every one of those statements do not result in indictments, of course.”
That last point reveals a fundamental truth the mainstream media keeps ignoring: this is not about a meme, but a potential coordinated threat.
Federal agents have charged dozens of individuals this year alone for making violent statements against President Trump or other political figures.
The Comey indictment, by contrast, came only after a nearly year-long review by multiple agencies.
It’s worth remembering that Comey, as the nation’s top law enforcement officer, was no stranger to weaponizing investigations against his political opponents.
From the Clinton email scandal to the infamous Russia hoax, his fingerprints were all over the most partisan federal interference of the last decade.
Now, the irony is impossible to miss: the very machinery he once used so liberally has turned its attention to him.
Blanche’s steady defense of the department’s actions stood in stark contrast to the frantic responses of the mainstream press.
The acting attorney general offered no details of the evidence but expressed confidence that it will withstand scrutiny in open court.
For a DOJ long criticized for double standards, this case may test whether it can finally apply justice without regard to political affiliation.
As the left continues to paint Trump supporters as violent extremists for even questioning the system, the Comey indictment exposes yet another double standard.
When a liberal icon is accused of crossing the line, the talking heads suddenly rediscover nuance. Blanche’s comments left no such ambiguity. The grand jury saw enough evidence to indict, and the rest will come to light at trial.
In the end, Todd Blanche delivered the message that few in the corporate media wanted to hear: this DOJ will not ignore credible threats just because they come from elite, well-connected insiders.
Whether or not the evidence against Comey proves to be substantial, the process itself marks a dramatic shift in accountability for Washington’s old guard.
