Judge Pushes Trump Assassination Threat Case Until After Midterms

A judge has granted a delay in the assassination threat case being held in the Eastern District of North Carolina.

The felony charges against Former FBI Director James Comey for his ’86-47′ messaging is officially on hold.

The case will now be shelved until after the midterm elections.

With a slew of motions currently still under review, which call for the judge to simply throw the case out all together…

The two felony counts of threatening the life of the President have so far withstood the attempts by Comey’s defense team of getting the charges dismissed.

As I searched out the details of this story, I realized fairly quickly that, even in 2026, a big part of this story remains the MEDIA’S CONTINUED COMPLICITY.

Before we get into the details, just check out this NBC News headline share on X for a clear example of what I mean:

The seashells-based prosecution of former FBI Director James Comey has been delayed until early 2027, as a judge makes her way through several pending motions. https://t.co/5PYp1UxxNJ

— NBC News (@NBCNews) September 25, 2026

Click to expand...

Could NBC News be any more pro-Comey or overtly anti-Trump than using the ‘seashells-based prosecution’ wording?

Just to show how pervasive the problem still is, in what purports to be ‘nonbiased’ mainstream reporting…

I’ll be pointing to that very NBC News article as my first quoted source.

Don’t worry. They get the basic facts right in this story. (Mostly, anyway — and I’ll point out where they push that bias!)

The U.S. District Judge refused to actually set a date for when the case would continue, only iterating that it would be next January, according to this report from NBC News:

The seashells-based prosecution of former FBI Director James Comey has been delayed until early 2027, as a judge makes her way through a number of pending motions, including a request by Comey to dismiss the case on grounds that it was driven by President Donald Trump’s animus.

U.S. District Judge Louise Flanagan declined to set a trial date in the case against Comey, in which prosecutors say that a photo he posted on Instagram of seashells arranged to spell out “8647” amounted to a threat against the president. The term “86” is widely considered to be restaurant slang for running out of or canceling an item, and 47 is thought to be a reference to the 47th president.

Comey’s team had asked to delay the case.

Comey’s team also spotlighted what it calls the “extreme bias” of a key witness in the seashells case: an estranged associate of the Comeys who said they hoped Comey went to jail.

The lead prosecutor in the case, a rookie federal prosecutor named Matthew Petracca, left the prosecution in May. (Emphasis added.)

Click to expand...

It would be far easier to simply report the news without having to constantly point out the bias interwoven in almost EVERY mainstream source. (But that’s the job!)

I had to include the closing line of that NBC News story for no other reason (they didn’t have a good reason, either…) than to point out how far they will fudge known facts to push that bias.

Just like their ‘seashell-based prosecution’ quip, NBC News obviously wants you to see weaknesses in the prosecution beyond what the known facts would convey, without openly confessing to their bias.

The prosecutor that left in May — here’s what the DOJ actually reported about that move, as covered by The Guardian:

The justice department filed notice with the court on Friday evening that Matthew Petracca, a prosecutor from the US attorney’s office for the eastern district of North Carolina, had been replaced by assistant US attorney Timothy Severo.

“This move has nothing to do with the merits of any case,” a justice department spokesperson said. “Offices balance resources across shifting civil and criminal dockets, and roster changes are common. Mr Petracca shifted to a civil AUSA position that recently became available in the office. An experienced AUSA picked up the case.”

Click to expand...

Leave it to NBC News to turn that into some kind of indictment against the DOJ prosecution.

But let’s not forget the inference you are intended to pick up from that so-called ‘unbiased’ story, which goes so far overboard trying to convince you that ‘8647’ is mostly, commonly, and only used in the restaurant world.

Really? Is that really the main purpose behind that numeric slang?

Or was that just another example of Comey trying to play coy — taking the attitude that he’s just an innocent, stand-up kinda guy — while literally calling for another attempt on the President’s life?

Here’s a better question.

Is there any history of Comey using that approach?

Let me enter into evidence this clip of James Comey from about 4 months ago, during an appearance on Meet The Press, to help answer that question:

HOLY CRAP! Disgraced and indicted former FBI Director James Comey just issued a DEEP STATE call to action: “Hang on” in the shadows until a Democrat becomes president

They just SAY IT on NATIONAL TV.

COMEY: “I have great confidence in the people down below…HANG ON, 2.5… pic.twitter.com/Sw3UleCT67

— War Correspondent (@warDaniel47) September 23, 2026

Click to expand...

Wait — was that James Comey simply telling the true patriots in the FBI and elsewhere to hold on until Tyrant Trump loses his throne in the White House? (It literally pains me to use the language of the TDS sufferers.)

Or… was that James Comey telling the Deep State actors within the government to do everything in their power to wait out President Trump’s term, so they can get back to the business of colluding together to control the narrative, the Presidency, and the country as a whole?

It may have been more like he was BEGGING them, knowing his goose is cooked… otherwise.

Just to keep that coverage ‘even’ — though I make no declaration of being unbiased, unlike the lamestream Trump-hating media…

Here’s a clip from one of President Trump’s top legal bull dogs (I use that term with the utmost respect!) painting Comey’s actions, even before the 86-47 post, in a slightly different light:

“It truly is one of the most heinous things that has ever happened in the history of our country — what James Comey did,” says @StephenM.

“James Comey, as the head of the FBI, tried to lay a trap to remove a duly elected President from office… and to lead an actual coup.” pic.twitter.com/92GfjcvRAg

— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) September 27, 2025

Click to expand...

With those accusations in mind, coupled with the charge he is facing alleging Comey knowingly threatened the life of President Trump… consider this.

The judge in the case is still weighing the possibility of just dismissing the case, as Politico’s Josh Gerstein so gleefully pointed out today:

JUST IN: Judge Louise Flanagan (GWBush/EDNC) delays James Comey arraignment in seashells case to Jan. 2027. Was set for next Wednesday. Defense asked for delay and govt consented. Several motions to dismiss are pending. Doc: https://t.co/GwY9vX7Ulk

— Josh Gerstein (@joshgerstein) September 25, 2026

Click to expand...

But, here’s the strange twist in the plot.

The prosecution did not try to argue against the motion by Comey’s team to delay the court proceedings.

I’m about to throw some local coverage at you from the Federal District where this is all playing out which verifies that point.

But it also includes one snippet of Comey’s defense, which… if I’m not wrong… sounds like the sort of argument that WEAKENS Comey’s overall case.

Here are more details of what just went down, as covered by the local Carolina Journal out of Raleigh:

Comey had been scheduled to appear before US District Judge Louise Flanagan on Wednesday. Flanagan issued an order Friday afternoon delaying that appearance until next year.

Government prosecutors did not oppose the delay.

“The court finds that the ends of justice served by granting the requested continuance and setting arraignment in January 2027, outweigh the best interests of the public and defendant in a speedy trial,” Flanagan wrote. “The gravity of the charges, pending motions, and the need to provide defense counsel additional time to prepare for trial promote need for continuance.”

“Mr. Comey makes this motion because additional time is needed to prepare for trial,” his lawyers wrote in a motion. “First, the motions to dismiss filed by Mr. Comey are substantial and required much time and effort to draft and finalize. The focus of counsel for Mr. Comey’s efforts during the period before 1 September 2026 has been on preparing and finalizing these motions, and then preparing and finalizing the replies to the Government’s substantial responses. Some of the motions filed by Mr. Comey seek pretrial hearings and/or in camera review of materials by the Court.”

“Next, if the motions to dismiss are not granted, counsel for Mr. Comey have much work to do to prepare for trial that will require substantial additional time, including, but not limited to, preparing for and participating in any pretrial hearings that may occur, reviewing discovery material for trial preparation, considering a potential defense case including potential expert witness testimony, and considering and drafting various motions in limine,” Comey’s lawyers added. “In addition, there is a disagreement concerning the application of attorney-client privilege and the attorney work product doctrine to certain conversations reviewed by a Government filter attorney as to which the defense will shortly be filing a motion with the Court.”

One of Comey’s Sept. 1 briefs supported his motion to have the case dismissed because the social media post did not amount to a “true threat” against Trump.

“This motion raises one dispositive legal question: Based on the indictment’s allegations, would reasonable observers have viewed Mr. Comey’s social-media post as a true threat?” his lawyers wrote. “To resolve that objective legal question, the Court need only consult the indictment, dictionaries, and undisputed public documents. Those materials make the answer straightforward: reasonable people would not have viewed a photo of seashells on a beach arranged in ‘86 47’ — with the caption ‘Cool shell formation on my beach walk’ — as a serious expression of Mr. Comey’s intent to harm the President. Instead, they would have viewed it as a political statement.” (Emphasis added.)

Click to expand...

As far as the DOJ’s lack of opposing Comey’s request to delay, I don’t really have any facts to report on that.

I can make a few guesses as to why:

1. The DOJ wants this to be a ‘clean’ case against Comey without clouding any verdict with the Midterm election rhetoric, confident in the evidence against him.
2. The DOJ remains infiltrated and is unwilling or unable to get their act together on this case.

Both of those are admittedly conjecture. But that’s the spectrum within which I can only assume the reality exists.

I’d like to draw your attention to the tidbit included in that article from the Carolina Journal which articulated a specific argument Comey’s team is using to try to get the case thrown out entirely.

In that motion, Comey’s defense did several things.

In the wording itself, they admitted it was an 86 AND a 47. Not 8647… but two distinct components.

They also took an approach that relies on the SUBJECTIVENESS of arguing for what a ‘reasonable’ person might take from Comey’s Instagram post.

But then the brief ends with a declaration by his team that a ‘reasonable’ person would have only viewed it as a ‘political statement’.

To paint the picture of that I’m seeing in my head, taken together, those all add up to THIN ICE!

That particular motion to dismiss agrees that 86-47 means to get rid of, does not dispute that Trump is the intended subject matter, and DECLARES that it was a ‘political statement’… put forward by the former FBI Director (top Law Enforcement Officer in the Nation) which the record clearly shows HATES PRESIDENT TRUMP — at the very least!

I’m no law clerk, but that seems to add up to a flimsy argument bordering on a counterproductive argument — am I wrong?

In the wild world of federal court, we know anything can and does often happen.

But as it stands, we’ll have to wait until after the Midterm Elections to find out which way the wind will blow in Comey’s ‘seashell-based’ felony case.

I’m also not a prophet, but I can prognosticate one thing with almost Biblical certainty.

Come January, the mainstream media will still have the same bias against President Trump and the same predilection for smoothing things over for the likes of James Comey.

It remains to be seen whether or not he’ll end up behind bars.

But you can take my media prediction to the bank — I guarantee!

Continue reading...

[ H/T WLT Report ]