The Trump administration is probing former FBI Director James Comey over a cryptic social media post that has raised eyebrows. Some government officials and Trump supporters are interpreting the post as a veiled threat to the president.
On Thursday, Comey posted a photo on Instagram featuring seashells on a beach, arranged into the numbers “8647.” His caption simply read: “Cool shell formation on my beach walk.” But the seemingly innocent post has sparked controversy.
The number “8647” has raised suspicion because “eighty-six” is a well-known slang term meaning “to get rid of” or “throw out,” often used in the service industry. It can also imply “to kill,” though Merriam-Webster doesn’t officially recognize this meaning due to its recent emergence and limited use. What’s more, Trump is both the 45th and 47th president of the United States, adding an extra layer of intrigue to the post. Could Comey’s photo be a subtle reference to the president?
The post quickly ignited a firestorm among some Republicans, who saw it as a thinly veiled threat against the president. Donald Trump Jr. didn’t hold back, accusing Comey of “calling for my dad to be murdered.” The backlash was swift and intense, with many questioning Comey’s intentions behind the cryptic numbers.
However, Comey quickly deleted the post within hours, insisting that he never intended it as a violent message. He explained that he thought the shell arrangement was simply a “political message,” not a threat. The mystery deepens, though, as it’s still unclear who actually arranged the shells in the first place. Was it a random coincidence, or something more intentional?
Comey has been a vocal critic of Trump ever since he served as FBI Director during the president’s first term. Their relationship soured in 2017, when Trump abruptly fired Comey, four years into his ten-year tenure, while Comey was overseeing the investigation into Russia’s alleged interference in the 2016 election. This firing only deepened the tension between the two, making any cryptic posts from Comey even more politically charged.
“I didn’t realize some folks associate those numbers with violence,” Comey wrote on Instagram in response to the backlash. “It never occurred to me, but I oppose violence of any kind, so I took the post down.” Despite his explanation, the controversy surrounding the post continues to swirl, leaving many to wonder whether it was a simple misunderstanding or something more deliberate.
Several Republican lawmakers are demanding that Comey face serious consequences, with calls ranging from a formal investigation to potential arrest. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem took action late Thursday, announcing that her department, along with the Secret Service, is “investigating this threat and will respond appropriately.” NPR reached out to Comey for comment but had not received a response by the time this story was published. The situation continues to escalate, with the investigation into the post now drawing significant attention.
On Friday, Secret Service spokesperson Anthony Guglielmi told NPR that the agency is aware of Comey’s post and emphasized that they take “rhetoric like this very seriously.” The agency’s response further underscores the heightened scrutiny surrounding the incident, as the investigation into the controversial Instagram post intensifies.
“The Secret Service vigorously investigates anything that can be taken as a potential threat against our protectees,” Guglielmi stated. This strong stance highlights the seriousness with which the agency is approaching the situation, underscoring the gravity of any perceived threat to the safety of the president and other individuals under their protection.
Some Republicans, including Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, have expressed skepticism, stating they don’t believe Comey was truly unaware of the violent connotations associated with the term. They argue that, given Comey’s political experience, he likely understood the implications of the numbers and the potential for them to be interpreted as a threat. This view has added fuel to the ongoing controversy surrounding the post.
“I’m very concerned for the president’s life; we’ve already seen assassination attempts,” Gabbard told Fox News on Thursday. “I’m very concerned for his life, and James Comey, in my view, should be held accountable and put behind bars for this.” Gabbard’s remarks reflect the growing alarm among some Republicans, who believe the post could be more than just a misunderstanding and demand serious consequences for Comey.
During his reelection campaign last year, then-candidate Trump survived two assassination attempts. These incidents have added to the heightened concerns about his safety, with some arguing that any rhetoric or actions perceived as threats should be taken very seriously.
During his reelection campaign last year, then-candidate Trump faced two serious assassination attempts. In July, he was wounded in a shooting at a campaign rally in Pennsylvania. Then, in September, a man named Ryan Routh aimed his rifle at the president’s security detail while Trump was golfing in Florida, but fled after being spotted. Routh was charged with the attempted assassination of a presidential candidate, though he has pleaded not guilty. On Thursday, he requested that a judge dismiss some of the charges against him. These incidents have further fueled concerns about the president’s safety and the intense political climate surrounding him.
On Friday, Trump told Fox News that he believes Comey “knew exactly what he meant” with the controversial post. The president’s comment adds to the growing tension surrounding the incident, suggesting that Trump and his supporters view Comey’s actions as intentional rather than accidental.
“A child knows what that meant. If you’re the FBI director and you don’t know … that meant ‘assassination,'” Trump said in a clip of an interview scheduled to air Friday night. “And it says it loud and clear. He wasn’t very competent, but he was competent enough to know what that meant.” Trump’s statement underscores his belief that Comey’s post was intentional, fueling the debate over its true meaning and the intentions behind it.
’86’ has shown up in politics before
This isn’t the first time that “86” has caused a stir in U.S. politics. The term has been used in various political contexts to refer to removing or dismissing someone, often in a figurative sense. However, its association with violence or threats has occasionally raised concerns, as it did with Comey’s Instagram post. Given its history in political rhetoric, the use of “86” in this instance only deepens the controversy and sparks debate about its intent.
The term “86” seemed to enter the political lexicon in 2018, when Sarah Huckabee Sanders, then-press secretary in the first Trump administration, was asked to leave a restaurant in Virginia. The restaurant’s closing staff wrote “86 Sarah Huckabee Sanders” on a note to the morning manager, and a photo of the note quickly went viral. This public incident brought attention to the term’s use in a political context, further fueling its association with “getting rid of” someone, and adding another layer to its controversial use in current events like Comey’s Instagram post.
In October 2020, Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer, a Democrat, appeared in a Zoom interview with Meet the Press, during which an “8645” pin was visible behind her. This raised eyebrows among some Republicans, who speculated that she might be sending a pointed, or potentially violent, message. The numbers “8645” seemed to echo the same controversial connotations as “8647,” adding to the ongoing political tension and further embedding the term in the political discourse.
At the time, Detroit News reported that Whitmer’s team responded to the Trump campaign’s reaction by suggesting that it was clear no one in the campaign had worked in the restaurant industry. They argued that “86” was simply a reference to an industry term for removing an item from the menu, not a hidden political or violent message. The remark highlighted the divide over interpreting the term, with some seeing it as harmless while others viewed it as a deliberate and provocative statement.
Anne Curzan, a linguist at the University of Michigan, told Michigan Public at the time that the most accurate meaning of the term “86” was likely the same as in the Huckabee Sanders incident — to “get rid of” or “remove.” She emphasized that the term, rooted in the restaurant industry, generally refers to something being taken off the menu or dismissed. However, given the political context, it was open to interpretation, and its use in such settings sparked further debate over its intended meaning.
“It could mean they’re fired, that there’s no more use for them, they’ve been asked to leave,” Curzan explained. “So that meaning is out there as well, which is more relevant to the ‘8645.’” This interpretation aligns with the context of Whitmer’s “8645” pin, where the numbers could have been understood as symbolizing the removal or dismissal of someone, rather than anything more violent or threatening. However, the political climate made it easy for others to read between the lines and perceive a more charged message.
The “8647” slogan has quietly evolved into a code for opposition to Trump, gaining traction in TikTok posts and appearing on protest signs in recent months. While its origins may have been innocuous, it has since become a symbol used by critics to express their disdain for the former president, further fueling the debate over its meaning and political significance.
In March, the online publication Distractify reported that people have started using the “8647” slogan to express their desire for Trump not to be president. It has become a way for some to signal opposition to him without directly stating it, allowing the phrase to circulate in digital spaces like TikTok and social media, where it has gained popularity as a subtle yet clear form of protest.
“The message is vague about how exactly these people want to do that, but it seems that the point is to signal that you don’t want Trump to be in the White House,” Distractify noted. This highlights how the “8647” slogan has become a symbolic expression of opposition, with its meaning open to interpretation, but its intent clear to those who use it as a form of protest.
In April, Republican Senator Mike Lee of Utah retweeted a photo of an “8647” sign from an anti-Trump protest, calling for widespread condemnation. He stated, “All Americans should condemn this.” Lee’s response reflects the growing political tension surrounding the slogan, with some viewing it as a dangerous or inappropriate symbol, while others see it as a peaceful expression of dissent.
On Thursday, Senator Mike Lee condemned Comey’s Instagram post in a lengthy 14-tweet thread, stating that it “hits too close to home — and occurs too soon after two serious, nearly successful assassination attempts … to be dismissed as a joke or harmless hyperbole.” Lee’s comments reflect the heightened sensitivity surrounding any rhetoric that could be perceived as threatening, especially in light of recent events involving attempts on the president’s life.
Some liberals see a double standard
Merchandise featuring the “8647” slogan, from shirts and hats to bumper stickers and pins, is widely available from vendors on platforms like Amazon and Etsy. Interestingly, items with “8646” — a reference to former President Joe Biden — are also being sold. This parallel has further fueled the use of these numbers as symbols of political opposition, with each set of numbers representing a clear stance against one of the two major political figures.
violate their seller policies prohibiting items that glorify violence.
ChatGPT said:
NPR has reached out to Amazon and Etsy to inquire whether the sale of “8647” and “8646” merchandise violates their seller policies, which prohibit items that glorify violence. The question of whether such merchandise crosses the line into harmful rhetoric or remains protected as political expression is a growing concern for both platforms, and their responses could have significant implications for the future of political merchandise online.
Some liberal critics on social media have pointed out the apparent double standard, arguing that Republicans didn’t seem to take issue when similar slogans — or even more violent rhetoric — were directed at a Democratic president. They argue that while the “8647” controversy is being treated with intense scrutiny, similar or even more explicit expressions of opposition toward President Obama or President Biden were often dismissed or downplayed by some of the same voices now condemning Comey’s post. This has sparked a debate about consistency and political bias in the response to such rhetoric.
Liberal critics are pointing to examples of violent rhetoric from President Trump and his allies to highlight what they see as hypocrisy. One such example is a 2024 post on Truth Social, where Trump shared a video featuring a truck driving on the highway with an image of President Biden tied up on the back. Additionally, in 2021, then-Rep. Paul Gosar, R-Ariz., was censured after sharing an anime video depicting him killing Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and swinging swords at President Biden. These incidents, critics argue, were met with less outrage from Republicans, raising questions about the consistency of their condemnation of political violence.
Some critics have pointed to examples of prominent conservatives using the “86” slogan over the years, suggesting a double standard in the current backlash against Comey’s post. For instance, far-right influencer Jack Posobiec tweeted “86 46” in 2022, a reference to President Biden (46th president). In 2024, then-Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., used the term “86” to describe Republicans who had been removed from office, but this did not spark significant controversy at the time. These examples raise questions about why the same rhetoric is being treated so differently depending on the speaker and context.