Former FBI Director James Comey has filed new motions to dismiss federal charges accusing him of threatening President Trump. The charges stem from Comey posting a photo of seashells arranged in the numbers “86 47” on Instagram. Comey’s legal team argues the indictment is part of an effort to retaliate against him for his criticism of Trump, citing vindictive and selective prosecution.
The motion includes a 76-page spreadsheet detailing insults exchanged between Trump and Comey over the years. Comey’s lawyers are asking the court to dismiss the charges and suppress evidence from warrants issued for Comey’s accounts. They allege misconduct by the government, including withholding grand jury proceedings leading to the indictment.
Comey’s attorneys claim the government has singled him out because of Trump’s animus toward him. The Justice Department denies targeting Comey for his political views. In addition to the motion to dismiss, Comey accuses the U.S. Secret Service of conducting warrantless surveillance on him. His legal team points to discussions among Secret Service staff about tracking Comey’s phone location, which some personnel opposed legally.
Further, Comey’s lawyers have requested a Franks hearing, seeking to determine if the government misled the magistrate approving search warrants related to Comey’s and his wife’s digital accounts. Comey’s legal team asserts the affidavits omitted known facts and misled magistrates.
The motion argues the warrants relied on a witness estranged from Comey, who claimed the “86 47” post related to restaurant slang rather than a threat. Comey’s team highlights inquiries into the term within cases Comey worked on, which proved inconclusive.
The charges relate to a years-long feud between Trump and Comey, dating back to when Trump fired Comey in 2017. The government claims Comey’s Instagram post was a threat, but Comey denies any intent to threaten, arguing the post was a political message and confirming his opposition to violence.
To toss out selective prosecution claims, defendants must show discrimination in charges and that similar actions by others have not been prosecuted. For vindictive prosecution, proof is needed that prosecution was solely animus-driven. Courts are often skeptical of such claims. Comey’s team points to the availability of merchandise with similar slogans and lack of government action against sellers.
The Justice Department, headed by Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, denies Comey’s prosecution is politically motivated. Blanche argues the case originated with local prosecutors in North Carolina, not under Trump’s directive. He maintains threats against the president cannot be overlooked, dismissing claims of selective and vindictive prosecution.
Leave a Reply