What do we understand this indictment to be about?

We are told by a very good source that this indictment relates to an investigation into the allegations that former FBI director James Comey had made threats against the president's life.

When he posted something on Instagram, which was a picture, of some shells arranged in a certain way, which he took to be a political message.

He captioned it, oh, interesting message here. It said 8647. He was interviewed about this by FBI agents as he drove back from a beach trip and this investigation went on.

And now we understand a grand jury has returned an indictment for him making this threat against the life of the president.

Legally sound footing?

Lisa?

It's hard to say because the Supreme Court has upheld a statute that penalizes making threats against a president.

People said, for example, in the 1960s that this was an infringement on First Amendment rights.

Supreme Court said, no, the statute is constitutional, but it has to be a true threat.

And by that, what some people have interpreted that to mean is that a reasonable person looking at all of the evidence would themselves understand it as a threat.

Political hyperbole, said the Supreme Court, is not a threat.

Something made in jest is not a threat.

So I think there is somewhat of an uphill climb here for the Department of Justice in establishing that Jim Comey actually meant this as a threat against the life of the president, as opposed

to a statement about getting rid of him from office or having the country be rid of him as

a political scourge, not as a threat against his life.

The District of North Carolina returned an indictment against James Comey on two counts.

The first count is that on or about May 15th of last year,

he knowingly and willfully making a threat to take the life of

and to inflict bodily harm upon the President of the United States.

Count two, same day, May 15th,

2025 that the defendant, James Comey, knowingly and willfully transmitting an interstate commerce

...