Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche has clarified that the phrase '86 47' does not automatically constitute a threat under Department of Justice (DOJ) policy. This comes as President Trump labels the phrase a mob death threat and former FBI Director James Comey faces indictment related to a photograph featuring the term.

'86 47' Not Automatically a Threat, DOJ Says

Blanche addressed concerns surrounding the widespread use of '86 47,' a combination of restaurant industry jargon and the number of the current president. During an interview with NBC News’ Kristen Welker, he explained that the numbers alone do not meet the criteria for a prosecutable threat according to DOJ guidelines.

Welker pointed out the availability of numerous products featuring the phrase on platforms like Amazon.com. Blanche acknowledged its prevalence but stressed that each potential threat requires a thorough investigation based on specific facts and circumstances.

Comey Indictment Defended

The conversation shifted to the recent indictment of James Comey, who was charged after posting a photograph of seashells arranged to spell out '86 47' on Instagram. Comey later removed the image and stated he was unaware of its potential violent connotations.

Blanche defended the indictment, emphasizing that the DOJ does not base charges solely on public perception. He stated that the decision to indict Comey was based on a comprehensive, 11-month investigation, and the seashell post was only one element of the case.

Trump's Claims and Free Speech Concerns

President Trump has publicly characterized '86 47' as a mob term for killing him, stating on Truth Social, “86 is a mob term for kill him. They say 86 him! 86 47 means kill President Trump.” He also accused Comey of knowingly using a code for assassination.

These claims have fueled reactions from both Trump supporters and civil libertarians. Critics argue the Comey case could set a dangerous precedent, potentially chilling free speech and artistic expression. The term '86' has benign origins in the restaurant industry, simply meaning to remove an item from a menu.

Balancing Security and Constitutional Rights

Legal experts note that without explicit intent to cause harm, the phrase may be protected under the First Amendment. The DOJ maintains it has already charged dozens of individuals this year for making direct threats against President Trump and other officials.

The case against Comey is expected to test the boundaries of online speech regulation and the balance between security concerns and constitutional rights in a politically polarized environment.