Why It Matters
The criminal charges filed against former FBI Director James Comey over an Instagram post featuring the numbers “8647” have raised questions about whether thousands of Americans selling or wearing similar merchandise could face prosecution. Legal scholars say the likelihood of widespread charges remains low, citing First Amendment protections for political expression.
The case tests the boundaries of protected political speech and threatens to create uncertainty around symbolic forms of protest that have become common on both sides of the political spectrum.
What Happened
Federal prosecutors indicted Comey on two felony counts this week after he posted a photograph on Instagram showing seashells arranged to form the numbers 8647. Authorities allege the image constitutes a threat against President Donald Trump. Comey denies wrongdoing.
The numerical phrase references restaurant industry slang, where “86” means to remove an item from the menu or eject a customer. The addition of “47” refers to Trump’s position as the 47th president. The shorthand has appeared on clothing, hats, stickers, and other items sold across major online retailers including Amazon and Etsy.
Florida congressional candidate Mark Davis sells shirts and hats bearing the phrase on his campaign website for $29.99. Davis, an Air Force veteran running as a no-party-affiliated candidate, said he wears the merchandise openly in his conservative neighborhood and has no plans to stop.
By The Numbers
Hundreds of products featuring 8647 are currently available for purchase online. Prices range from approximately $18 for basic designs to $30 or more for campaign-affiliated merchandise. Similar items bearing the phrase 8646—which circulated during the Biden administration as a call to remove the 46th president—remain on sale without having prompted legal action.
Comey faces potential prison time if convicted on both felony counts. The Department of Homeland Security previously investigated Comey over the post, and Secret Service agents questioned him before the indictment was filed.
Separately, Comey was indicted last year on charges of making false statements to Congress and obstructing congressional proceedings, but those charges were later dismissed.
Legal Analysis
Former federal prosecutor Neama Rahmani told reporters that merchandise and social media posts using 8647 represent protected political speech under the First Amendment. Rahmani said successful prosecution requires proof that a defendant acted intentionally and willfully communicated a threat to the president.
“8647 is not a true threat to the president,” Rahmani said, noting that the restaurant term refers to removal rather than violence. He predicted the case against Comey will be dismissed.
Former federal prosecutor Katie Cherkasky said the charges hinge on whether prosecutors can demonstrate the post meets the legal standard for a “true threat”—a narrow category of unprotected speech—and that Comey understood or consciously disregarded that his post would be interpreted as threatening.
Double Standard Questions
Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche addressed questions about why the phrase 8646, which targeted President Biden, did not result in similar prosecutions. Political commentator Jack Posobiec used the phrase in social media posts that remain online, and merchandise bearing 8646 is still sold on major platforms.
Blanche said grand juries conduct full investigations rather than making indictment decisions based on single images. He stated that he does not know whether investigations into other uses of similar phrases yielded different conclusions, and emphasized that not every comment or threat directed at the president results in charges.
“Every day there’s comments made about President Trump, threats made against President Trump. Every one of those are not indicted. It depends on the facts of every case,” Blanche said during an appearance on CBS Mornings.
What’s Next
Comey’s case will proceed through the federal court system, where judges will determine whether the Instagram post meets the legal threshold for a true threat. The outcome could establish precedent for how similar symbolic political expression is treated under criminal statutes protecting government officials.
Davis said he has no intention of removing his merchandise from sale. “Arrest us all. I dare you,” he said, describing the phrase as a response to what he views as years of intimidation from the current administration.
Amazon and Etsy did not respond to requests for comment on whether they plan to remove 8647 merchandise from their platforms.