Acting AG Todd Blanche says Comey indictment looks beyond ‘a single Instagram post’

Added: 2026-05-06

[00:00:00]All right, let's move on to former FBI Director James Comey. A grand jury has indicted the former FBI director for this Instagram post. I want to put it up. I think a lot of folks have seen it at this point. 8647 in seashells, which the indictment says, quote, 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. How does that image of seashells amount to a serious threat against the president's life? Well, every case requires an investigation.

[00:00:35]And what you just showed is what is one part of that investigation. What you just showed is the Instagram post. Rest assured that the career Assistant United States Attorneys in North Carolina, the career FBI agents, the career Secret Service agents that investigated this case didn't just look at the Instagram post and walk away. That's why you saw an indictment last week, um notwithstanding the fact that it was last May that the the post was made. So, I I am not permitted to get into the details of what the grand jury heard or found, as you know, but rest assured that it's not just the Instagram post that leads somebody to get indicted.

[00:01:08]Well, part of what the government would have to prove is intent. James Comey deleted the post the same day, and he wrote, quote, I didn't realize some folks associate those numbers with violence. It never occurred to me, but I oppose violence of any kind, so I took the post down. How do you prove intent, Mr. Blanche when Mr. Comey himself said he didn't understand that some people would look at that and think about violence?

[00:01:36]>> You prove intent like like you always prove intent. You prove intent with witnesses, you prove intent with documents, with materials. So So again, this is not just about a single Instagram post. This is about a body of evidence that the grand jury collected over the series of about 11 months. That evidence was presented to the grand jury, and it's not the government, it's not the Department of Justice, it's not Todd Blanche that returned an indictment against James Comey. It's a grand jury, part of the judicial process, and that that this process has to be allowed to play out in the courts. It's not fair to to Mr. Comey, it's certainly not fair to the prosecutors for us to to be airing your view or my view of this indictment.

[00:02:14]It's it's something that will present it in court at the at the at the time set by the judge.

[00:02:18]>> delve a little deeper. Conservative legal scholar Jonathan Turley said, quote, this indictment is facially unconstitutional absent some unknown new facts. Are there Are you in fact saying that there are facts beyond this Instagram post that clearly establish an intent to threaten the president's life?

[00:02:39]I've said repeatedly this [clears throat] was an investigation that lasted 11 months. If the only facts that existed was the posting of the Instagram, obviously that wouldn't have taken 11 months. And so when Mr. Turley talks about whether it's facially unconstitutional absent unknown facts or circumstances, we will necessarily have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt at trial every element of this crime, which we're prepared to do. Can you and will you let the public know what any of those other facts are? Absolutely. It's called a trial. That's what happens in every single case. We indict thousands of cases every year. Every one of those cases there's an indictment, and then eventually there is a trial or some sort of disposition. At the trial, a public trial, that will be open to the public, everybody in this country will know exactly what what what evidence the government has against Mr. Comey.

[00:03:28]>> you can't give me specifics, but can you give me any insight? Are you talking about writings? Are you talking about conversations? What it does this other evidence consist of? We are talking about evidence of all sorts, and that means documents, that means witnesses, and that means that means the whole array of what we did. And again, we are not talking about some political guy in DC running out and getting an indictment. We are talking about career prosecutors in North Carolina systematically investing a case with the FBI working with them, with the Secret Service with working with them, and now we have an indictment.

[00:04:01]>> Well, the image Excuse me, is part of what led to this indictment. It is worth noting that on amazon.com, we looked this up, there are dozens of products with the same terminology. We're showing it right here. 8647 being sold and purchased right now.

[00:04:18]Should individuals selling or buying 8647 merchandise be concerned that they're going to be prosecuted by the DOJ?

[00:04:26]>> This isn't about a single incident, okay? This isn't I mean, of course not.

[00:04:30]That's posted constantly. That phrase is used constantly. There are constantly men and women who choose to make threatening statements against President Trump. Every one of those statements do not result in indictments, of course.

[00:04:41]There are facts, there are circumstances, there are investigations that have to take place, and we have charged dozens and dozens of men and women this this year with threatening President Trump and others. So this isn't a new charge we're bringing. Just to be very clear, you are suggesting the seashells themselves are not at the root of this indictment.

[00:04:59]>> No, I am suggesting that every single case depends on the investigation that's done. And of course, the seashells are part of that case. I mean, that's that's what the public sees. But without a doubt, and it should be evident by the fact that it's been 11 months since the posting and the indictment, there is an investigation that takes place, and that's the result The result of that investigation is the indictment that was returned last week.

[00:05:22]>> Let's talk big picture. Back on September 20th, President Trump publicly posted a private message to then Attorney General Pam Bondi pressuring her to prosecute Senator Adam Schiff, James Comey, and Letitia James writing, quote, they're all guilty as hell, but nothing is going to be done. They impeached me twice, they indicted me five times over nothing. Justice must be served now. Why should the public believe that any case brought against the individuals listed there is an independent law enforcement decision and not retribution? Well, because you have investigations, and you have indictments, and you have the result I mean, listen, if if if years later you're judged by a simple note from President Trump. By the way, that wasn't a private message. That was a message delivered to the entire world. And so this is not being done behind closed doors.

[00:06:11]>> to be private initially based on my conversation.

[00:06:14]Based on my conversations, it was meant to be with the top administration officials. It was meant to be private and posted by mistake. President Trump is very clear with the American people what he expects as President of the United States. That is not something he hides from the American people. He wants justice, he wants full investigations where appropriate, and by the way, that's a good thing. That's not a bad thing. Everybody in this country should want that. And so, no, I don't operate based upon concern or fear. The American people will know exactly what we're doing and why we're doing it.

[00:06:46]>> And yet, Mr. Acting Attorney General, the Justice Department has already indicted former FBI Director James Comey, as you know, and New York Attorney General Letitia James, and a federal judge dismissed both of those cases. Why should people have confidence that this case will actually move forward and is rooted in fact?

[00:07:06]>> Well, let's let's let's be accurate, okay? The The judge dismissed those cases not based on a factual finding that President Trump did something wrong or that there was something wrong with the underlying facts leading to that indictment. The federal judge dismissed that case because he found that the US Attorney was not properly appointed.

[00:07:22]That's not a That there was no final finding on the facts or anything like that. So Look, those cases are on appeal. We will see what happens, but again, you're you're comparing apples to oranges when you say just because that indictment was dismissed there's something wrong with the underlying investigation.

[00:07:38]>> Well, again, he did directly push to have those people indicted, charges were brought, and then they were dropped.

[00:07:44]Does that not undercut potentially the trust that people have in the Justice Department?

[00:07:49]>> Absolutely not. And by the way, do you think or do the American people think that that nothing was done on those cases until President Trump posted that that truth in September? No, these are ongoing investigations. Investigations take time, investigations take effort, and so no, I I don't I am not concerned.

[00:08:06]What we do What we do at the Department of Justice, the American people can judge us, and they will, and I'm ready to be judged because we're doing the right thing. We're restoring justice, which nobody saw for 4 years. There weren't guests on your show for 4 years during the last administration being overly critical of what the Department of Justice is doing, and that was a problem, and we fixed it. We thank you for watching, and remember, stay updated on breaking news and top stories on the NBC News app or watch live on our YouTube channel.