Comey
(Photo
by
Eric
Thayer/Getty
Images)
It’s
said
that
history
repeats
itself,
first
as
tragedy,
then
as
farce.
When
it
comes
to
indictments,
the
Trump
administration’s
Department
of
Justice
has
streamlined
the
process
by
skipping
straight
to
farce
and
then
somehow
doing
it
twice.
A
federal
grand
jury
in
the
Eastern
District
of
North
Carolina
has
indicted
former
FBI
Director
James
Comey
for
the
high
crime
of
arranging
seashells.
Specifically,
posting
a
photo
to
Instagram
last
May
of
shells
on
a
beach
spelling
out
“86
47,”
captioned
“Cool
shell
formation
on
my
beach
walk.”
The
indictment
levels
two
counts
—
making
a
threat
against
the
president
under
18
U.S.C.
§
871(a),
and
transmitting
a
threat
in
interstate
commerce
under
§
875(c).
Because
Comey
arranges
sea
shells
by
the
sea
shore.
This
indictment
arrives
following
the
DOJ’s
faceplant
late
last
year,
when
insurance
lawyer
Lindsey
Halligan
attempted
to
indict
Comey
for
making
false
statements
in
the
Eastern
District
of
Virginia.
Halligan,
an
illegal
appointment
with
no
more
authority
than
a
random
person
off
the
street
—
to
use
the
federal
judge’s
language
—
had
been
unlawfully
appointed
on
top
of
turning
in
a
fake
indictment
the
full
grand
jury
never
voted
on.
This
epic
screw
up
resulted
in
the
putative
charges
against
Comey
becoming
time-barred.
That
earlier
indictment
was
bullshit.
But
at
least
it
was
serious-sounding
bullshit.
Going
after
Comey
for
lying
about
authorizing
leaks
seems
like
something
a
real
prosecutor
might
charge.
By
contrast,
the
new
indictment
in
the
Eastern
District
of
North
Carolina
lacks
such
gravitas.
The
government
lodged
criminal
charges
against
the
former
FBI
Director
for
using
Prohibition-era
slang
for
tossing
an
unwelcome
guest…
in
shell
form.
If
this
wasn’t
stupid
enough,
the
indictment
manages
to
MISSTATE
THE
LAW
in
the
indictment.
Count
I
describes
Comey’s
supposed
crime
as
creating
an
image
that
“a
reasonable
recipient
who
is
familiar
with
the
circumstances
would
interpret
as
a
serious
expression
of
an
intent
to
do
harm
to
the
President
of
the
United
States.”
Any
first-year
law
student
who
completed
Crim
Law
—
a
competence
bar
EDNC
US
Attorney
Ellis
Boyle
seemingly
failed
to
clear
—
will
note
that
the
Supreme
Court
in
Counterman
v.
Colorado
(2023),
replaced
the
“reasonable
recipient”
standard,
requiring
instead
a
showing
the
speaker
subjectively
understood
that
the
statement
would
be
perceived
as
threatening.
Even
if
the
indictment
included
the
proper
standard,
the
government
would
face
an
uphill
battle
since
Comey
deleted
the
post
the
same
day,
saying
that
he
hadn’t
realized
“86”
had
violent
connotations
—
which
it
doesn’t
really,
but
whatever
—
and
apologized.
The
second
count,
that
Comey
then
distributed
the
threat,
suffers
the
same
defects
as
the
first.
But
the
genuinely
unhinged
part
of
the
indictment
appears
on
the
next
page.
A
forfeiture
notice
seeking
“any
property,
real
or
personal,
which
constitutes
or
is
derived
from
proceeds
traceable
to
the
said
offense.”
Do
they
want
the
shells?
As
many
people
learned
from
the
Afroman
case,
law
enforcement’s
forfeiture
powers
are
extensive
and
deeply
corrupt.
The
language
of
the
indictment
flags
the
government’s
authority
to
seek
“substitute
assets”
in
the
event
they
can’t
actually
find
the
supposedly
ill-gotten
gains.
But
even
with
broad
latitude
to
steal
from
defendants,
it’s
hard
to
imagine
what
the
government
expects
to
get
out
of
James
Comey.
He’s
not
a
Kardashian
—
he’s
not
paid
thousands
of
dollars
for
posting
viral
vacation
Instas.
Perhaps
this
forfeiture
language
is
copypasta
the
government
mindlessly
drops
into
every
indictment.
But
given
the
cynical
and
petty
nature
of
this
Justice
Department,
it’s
hard
to
see
this
as
anything
but
a
threat
to
rob
the
former
FBI
Director.
In
some
ways,
it’s
fitting
that
the
pursuit
of
Comey
found
its
way
back
to
the
8647
nonsense.
When
the
image
first
appeared,
current
FBI
Director
(for
now!)
Kash
Patel
told
America
that
he
was
prioritizing
protecting
Trump’s
reputation
over
child
sex
predators.
Or,
more
accurately,
over
catching
child
sex
predators.
That’s
a
key
clarification
or
else
the
sentence
doesn’t
actually
make
sense,
does
it?
At
least
it’s
not
all
bad
news
for
the
Comey
family.
A
federal
judge
let
Maurene
Comey’s
lawsuit
go
forward.
Now
the
administration
is
arguing
in
one
court
that
they
would
never
retaliate
against
the
Comey
family,
while
in
another
court
prosecuting
Jim
Comey
for
a
beach
photo.
Why
did
this
loser
of
a
case
drop
now?
It’s
pretty
simple:
the
DOJ
wants
to
tie
this
shell
picture
from
a
year
ago
to
the
White
House
Correspondents’
Dinner
incident.
The
administration
needs
to
bootstrap
as
much
on
top
of
that
story
as
it
can
before
it
fades
from
the
headlines
and
bring
attention
back
to
topics
like
Todd
Blanche
covering
up
the
Epstein
files
or
why
Kash
Patel
is
being
called
“J.
Edgar
Boozer”
behind
his
back.
Is
this
prosecution
frivolous?
Yes.
Is
it
an
ominous
uptick
in
the
administration’s
willingness
to
chill
civil
liberties
and
stifle
criticism?
Also
yes.
It’s
an
uncommon
intersection:
Frivolinous.
(Indictment
available
on
the
next
page…)
Ex-FBI
Director
James
Comey
indicted
for
his
‘8647’
seashell
post
on
Instagram
[CNBC]
Earlier:
James
Comey
Enjoys
Long
Walks
On
The
Beach…
So
MAGA
Gonna
Send
Him
To
El
Salvador
Prison
Camp
Kash
Patel
Says
He’s
Prioritizing
Social
Media
Mocking
Trump
Over
‘Child
Sex
Predators,
Fentanyl
Traffickers,
Terrorists’
Joe
Patrice is
a
senior
editor
at
Above
the
Law
and
co-host
of
Thinking
Like
A
Lawyer.
Feel
free
to email
any
tips,
questions,
or
comments.
Follow
him
on Twitter or
Bluesky
if
you’re
interested
in
law,
politics,
and
a
healthy
dose
of
college
sports
news.
Joe
also
serves
as
a
Managing
Director
at
RPN
Executive
Search.