A former Coast Guard officer’s alleged plot to assassinate President Donald Trump has been tied to a cryptic Instagram post by ex-FBI Director James Comey, sparking outrage and copycat threats.
Fox News reported that Peter Stinson, a self-proclaimed Antifa member, faces federal charges for graphic threats that echoed Comey’s now-deleted “86 47” message. FBI Director Kash Patel calls it a predictable tragedy, blaming Comey’s recklessness for fanning the flames.
Stinson, a Northern Virginia resident, was arrested for threatening Trump’s life, with court documents revealing 13 references to “86 47,” a phrase lifted from Comey’s May 2025 post.
Many of Stinson’s threats predated Comey’s stunt, including posts during the 2024 campaign and a nod to the July 13, 2024, assassination attempt in Butler, Pennsylvania. The case underscores a dangerous trend of escalating rhetoric that conservatives argue is fueled by progressive dog-whistling.
Comey’s Instagram post, showing shells arranged as “86 47,” was deleted hours after it went viral, but not before drawing Trump’s ire and Secret Service scrutiny.
Merriam-Webster defines “86” as slang for “to get rid of,” while Trump is the 47th president, making the phrase a chilling dog whistle to some. Comey’s claim of innocence rings hollow when his post forced the FBI to divert agents from critical tasks to chase copycats, as Patel noted.
“I regret the distraction and the controversy around it,” Comey said on MSNBC, shrugging off the chaos his post unleashed. Yet he doubled down, claiming it was “totally innocent,” a stance that conservatives see as dodging accountability for reckless symbolism. His wife’s restaurant-server excuse for “86” feels like a flimsy afterthought, not a defense.
Stinson, a Coast Guard sharpshooter and FEMA instructor from 1988 to 2021, didn’t need much prompting to escalate his rhetoric.
His February 2025 X post declared, “Antifa always wins in the end,” embracing violence as “inherently necessary.” Such brazen calls to action highlight the radical undercurrents that MAGA supporters warn are emboldened by elite indifference.
On June 11, 2025, Stinson allegedly posted on BlueSky, “When he dies, the party is going to be yuge,” a sick twist on Trump’s signature flair.
Court documents show he referenced the Butler assassination attempt, mocking Secret Service agents for moving “way to (sic) long.” This isn’t free speech—it’s a blueprint for chaos, and conservatives argue it’s what happens when provocateurs like Comey play with fire.
“This is a guy who threatened President Trump’s life using the ‘86 47’ language,” Patel told Fox News Digital, pinning part of the blame on Comey’s stunt. The FBI chief’s frustration is palpable: agents were pulled from vital work to handle a flood of threats inspired by a former director’s social media lapse. For MAGA faithful, it’s proof the deep state still toys with America’s safety.
Patel warned that Stinson’s case was “tragically predictable,” a sentiment echoed by conservatives who see a pattern of leftist rhetoric inciting violence.
“Thankfully, law enforcement did excellent work preventing a potential violent actor,” Patel added, signaling vigilance. But the question lingers: why does it take arrests to expose the dangers of elite irresponsibility?
Stinson’s threats aren’t an isolated incident; a California man was indicted weeks earlier for targeting then-President-elect Trump post-reelection.
Attorney General Pam Bondi called out the pattern, noting Trump has survived “two deranged attempts on his life.” Her vow to prosecute such crimes fully is a nod to MAGA’s demand for law and order over progressive permissiveness.
“The Department of Justice takes these threats with the utmost seriousness,” Bondi declared, promising to throw the book at offenders. For conservatives, it’s a refreshing change from the perceived leniency of past administrations toward anti-Trump radicals. Yet the DOJ’s workload grows as provocations like Comey’s keep fueling the fire.
Comey, for his part, isn’t under investigation, a fact that rankles MAGA supporters who see a double standard. His MSNBC appearance, where he expressed mild regret but no real remorse, only deepens the distrust. If a Trump ally pulled a similar stunt, the outrage from progressives would be deafening, conservatives note.
Stinson’s first court appearance is set for June 18, 2025, a date that will likely draw intense scrutiny from both sides.
His Antifa ties and history of violent rhetoric paint a troubling picture of radicalization unchecked. For MAGA, it’s a stark reminder of the stakes in a polarized nation.
The “86 47” saga exposes a broader issue: elites like Comey dabbling in edgy symbolism without grasping the consequences. Conservatives argue his post wasn’t just tone-deaf—it was a spark in a tinderbox, amplifying threats like Stinson’s. The left’s silence on this recklessness speaks volumes, they say.
Patel’s FBI is now on high alert, a necessary but costly response to a crisis partly of Comey’s making. “We’ll continue to be on guard,” Patel vowed, a pledge that resonates with Trump’s base, who feel their leader is under siege. The contrast between Patel’s resolve and Comey’s deflection couldn’t be sharper.
