Former FBI Director James Comey is mounting a new effort to defeat federal charges over his “86 47” seashell post, using newly filed motions to accuse investigators of warrantless phone tracking, misleading warrant applications, and politically motivated prosecution.
Comey’s lawyers filed the motions Tuesday in federal court in North Carolina. They want the court to dismiss his two-count indictment, suppress evidence obtained from Apple and Google, and release records from the grand jury proceedings.
As previously reported by The Dallas Express, federal prosecutors accuse Comey of threatening President Donald Trump through a May 15, 2025, Instagram photograph showing seashells arranged to read “86 47.”
Prosecutors contend that “86” can mean to eliminate or kill someone and that “47” referred to Trump as the 47th president. Comey deleted the post after someone warned him that others could interpret it as a call for violence. He has denied intending to threaten Trump.
Comey challenges government investigation
Comey’s attorneys now argue that investigators violated his constitutional rights while attempting to establish what he meant.
Defense attorney Patrick Fitzgerald said in an affidavit that Secret Service personnel discussed obtaining Comey’s real-time cellphone location as Comey and his wife drove from North Carolina to Virginia on May 16, 2025.
An assistant to the special agent in charge objected because agents did not believe anyone faced an immediate threat, according to notes quoted in the affidavit.
“At that time we did not believe that anyone’s life was in immediate danger and legally it was a bad idea to ping the phone,” the notes state.
The Secret Service nevertheless sent Verizon an emergency request that asserted a “danger of death or serious physical injury,” according to Fitzgerald. He claims agents subsequently tracked Comey’s phone and followed the couple.
The government has not yet responded to that allegation in court.
The affidavit also quotes a Secret Service timeline entry stating that “POTUS was requesting a copy of the interview notes to use in his 6 pm press conference.” Comey’s attorneys cite the request as part of their argument that Trump took a personal interest in the investigation.
FBI searched for meaning of ‘86’
Comey’s lawyers also challenge the government’s attempt to show that his law enforcement background would have taught him that “86” meant murder.
The FBI searched its Sentinel database, records from Comey’s prosecution of the Gambino crime family, trial transcripts, and Comey’s social media history, according to the defense filings. At the direction of the U.S. attorney, investigators also queried Google’s artificial intelligence tools and ChatGPT about the term.
Two retired FBI agents who had worked organized crime cases did not recall mobsters using “86” to mean murder, Comey’s attorneys claim.
Investigators later interviewed former Gambino crime family underboss Salvatore “Sammy the Bull” Gravano.
Gravano told investigators that law enforcement personnel would know that “86” could carry an organized crime meaning connected to murder, according to the filing. However, he reportedly said a “gangster would never use that term” because law enforcement already knew it.
The defense also said Gravano did not interpret Comey’s post as a statement that Comey personally intended to commit violence.
Defense attacks warrants and witness
Comey’s attorneys contend that investigators omitted information damaging to their theory when seeking warrants for his Apple and Google account data.
The warrant applications cited an unnamed person who reportedly viewed the post as a violent threat. Comey’s lawyers claim that person had not spoken to Comey in at least two years, wanted him imprisoned, and initially understood “86” through its restaurant-industry meaning.
According to the defense, the person associated the term with violence only after hearing former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani discuss Comey’s organized crime prosecutions.
Comey’s attorneys argue that the government should have disclosed those circumstances to the judges who approved the warrants.
Comey alleges political prosecution
In a separate motion, Comey accuses the Trump administration of pursuing a vindictive and selective prosecution based on the president’s longstanding criticism of him.
The motion cites Trump’s public demands for Comey’s prosecution and claims other public figures made comparable or more inflammatory statements without facing charges.
Comey asks U.S. District Judge Louise Wood Flanagan to dismiss the case with prejudice. Alternatively, he wants discovery and a hearing into how the Justice Department decided to prosecute him.
The allegations represent Comey’s defense arguments. The court has not found that Trump directed the prosecution or that investigators violated the law.
DOJ stands behind charges
The Justice Department maintains that Comey knowingly posted a threat against Trump and consciously disregarded the risk that others would view it as threatening violence.
“As the former Director of the FBI, he knew full well the attention and consequences of making such a post,” FBI Director Kash Patel said when officials announced the indictment.
U.S. Attorney Ellis Boyle rejected accusations that the Justice Department singled out Comey.
“Our office regularly pursues threat cases including those against public officials,” Boyle said. “The Grand Jury examined the evidence in this case and found probable cause to indict Mr. Comey.”
A grand jury finding establishes probable cause, not guilt. Prosecutors must prove the charges beyond a reasonable doubt at trial.
The court gave prosecutors until August 18 to respond to Comey’s motions. Flanagan has not ruled on his requests.
Provided by Dallas Express
