When former FBI Director James Comey arranged seashells on a beach, he thought it was protected political speech, not a threat against President Donald Trump.
Because of this, on Monday, Comey urged a judge to throw out federal charges against him.
Comey’s lawyers argued the government cannot prove an Instagram photo of seashells arranged as“86 47" constituted a “true threat” against the president. Trump fired Comey in 2017 and has publicly called for his prosecution.
The slogan “86”— which has long meant to “get rid of” or “eject” — has been on thousands of items sold online and regularly displayed at protests, defense lawyers wrote in court papers.
“But the government now singles out Mr. Comey to prosecute one of the President’s most prominent critics for publishing another person’s statement of political opposition,” his attorney’s wrote. “That attempt to suppress core political speech contravenes both the statutes at issue and the First Amendment.”
This case was the second in months targeting Comey, a Trump adversary the president has called a “corrupt piece of garbage.”
An earlier case in Virginia accusing Comey of lying to Congress was dismissed in November after a judge concluded the prosecutor who charged him and another Trump adversary, New York Attorney General Letitia James, was illegally appointed to the job.
The case is also part of a retribution campaign by the Trump administration Justice Department.
The DOJ has initiated investigations into individuals the president does not like.
Comey has drawn Trump’s ire for his role overseeing the early months of an investigation into whether Trump’s 2016 campaign had coordinated with Russia to sway the outcome of that year’s election.
This two-count indictment charges Comey with “knowingly and willfully” making a threat to “take the life of, and to inflict bodily harm upon” Trump and with transmitting a threat in interstate commerce.
“It does not provide evidence that Comey knowingly threatened Trump, especially since Comey has said the opposite, but suggested a ‘reasonable recipient who is familiar with the circumstances would interpret’ the message as a threat,” the AP reported.