Federal prosecutors have zeroed in on James Comey’s crime thriller novel to help prove that he meant to threaten President Donald Trump’s life with his “86 47” social media post last year.
In a court filing late Monday defending their indictment, prosecutors argued that Comey knew the phrase was a call for violence against Trump in May 2025, when he posted a photo of seashells arranged with those numbers “only five days from public release” of the book.
To make the connection, prosecutors first used excerpts from the book, “FDR Drive,” which they say features a public figure who incites followers to kill his enemies through public messages.
They cited one passage describing “stochastic terrorism,” which generally refers to the use of public rhetoric to demonize a person or group: “Sean nodded. ‘It’s where a charismatic leader jacks people up but, through the wonder of the internet, avoids a direct connection to what comes next.’”
Trending
Prosecutors then continued: “On May 15, 2025, a charismatic leader named James Comey, through the wonder of the internet, posted a coded message to his followers meaning ‘kill’ or ‘get rid of’ (a euphemism for ‘kill’) President Trump.”
Prosecutors wrote that “86” was organized crime slang for kill and that “47” referred to Trump as the 47th president. “There is no serious dispute,” they wrote, “that an objective viewer of Comey’s post could read it to mean ‘Kill President Trump.’”
The filing was part of a larger batch of briefs from prosecutors responding to a sweeping attempt by Comey’s defense team to have the case thrown out. Together, they offer new insights into the government’s strategy for securing a conviction at trial, including the unorthodox approach of mining Comey’s fictional work for clues of his motive.
Comey, who has long drawn Trump’s political ire, was indicted in April on charges of threats against the president and making threats across state lines.
Defense lawyers attacked the Justice Department’s central theory of the case in hundreds of pages of filings last month, asking a judge to dismiss the indictment on the grounds that Comey’s post was not a true threat and that the Justice Department singled him out for prosecution because of his criticisms of Trump. Comey has said the message was political, not violent, and that “86” was harmless restaurant industry lingo.
In their filing Monday, prosecutors said Comey posted the image of the seashells amid a surge in violent threats and multiple assassination attempts on Trump — context, they said, that was essential for jurors to take into account at trial.
They also noted his novel centers on a federal prosecutor who takes on an extremist podcaster who uses his platform to fuel violence.Though Comey denied arranging the shells himself, prosecutors said, there was “no evidence that anyone else arranged, photographed or even saw the shells.”
Comey quickly deleted the post following outcry from Trump’s allies. Soon after, according to one filing from the government, Comey’s publishing agent sent him a text saying, “on the bright side, you’ve gone viral.” Comey replied, “Not my intention, but I’ll be OK if it sells books.” The agent texted back: “Music to an agent’s ears.”
Prosecutors detailed Comey’s media appearances to promote the novel. The filing points to a Wall Street Journal reporter asking him eight days after the post, “Is there a universe where you did this to promote your book?” to which Comey responded, “Not in a universe I live in.”
And the government also pointed to his appearance on “The Late Show with Stephen Colbert.” Colbert asked about the seashell post and said: “OK, well congratulations on the attention for, for your book. There you go. That is a hell of a viral campaign.”
In a separate filing, prosecutors rejected claims by the defense that the prosecution was “vindictive” or “selective” — legal terms that refer to prosecutors charging a defendant for exercising legal rights or bringing charges that haven’t been brought against similarly situated people. Both practices are unconstitutional, but the bar for proving them in court is high.
Prosecutors said Comey had not shown that Justice Department officials involved in the case had improper motives. “Instead, he speculates that they were induced by others with
improper motives,” they wrote. Nor could he show, they said, that others in his position were not prosecuted.
Prosecutors urged the judge to deny motions by the defense to turn over grand jury records, saying they were not required to present all of Comey’s potential defenses to grand jurors who authorized the indictment.
They also said the judge should reject the defense’s request to suppress evidence and to hold a Franks hearing, in which a judge decides whether investigators lied or left out important facts to secure a search warrant. Comey’s defense team had accused the Justice Department of misleading a magistrate judge, omitting key facts and making false statements in bringing the case.
The Justice Department had previously charged Comey with lying to Congress, but a judge dismissed the case after finding the lead prosecutor, a White House appointee, had no authority to bring the charges.
Author
