Congressman Jeff Van Drew, a Republican from New Jersey, said on Thursday that courts would ultimately determine whether former FBI Director James Comey’s actions rose to the level of a criminal threat, describing the situation as potentially “dangerous” and unprecedented given Comey’s past role.
In an interview, Van Drew, who sits on the House Judiciary Committee, weighed in as Comey faces federal charges tied to a 2025 social media post showing seashells arranged to read “86 47,” which prosecutors claim constituted a threat against President Donald Trump.
The case has sparked a national debate over whether the phrase “86,” commonly slang for removing or discarding something, can be interpreted as a call for violence when directed at the 47th president.
Van Drew emphasized that the broader context surrounding Comey is critical in evaluating the case.
“Nothing happens in a vacuum,” Van Drew said.
“So when you look at James Comey and his history of working with Igor Danchenko and the Steele dossier, which was funded by the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton, if you look at what he did with FISA and misused it to target individual people, all of it together, he has not really been on the straight and narrow,” Van Drew added.
He stated, “He hasn’t done the job that an FBI director should do.”
Comey has denied any intent to threaten violence and is expected to challenge the charges in court. Legal experts note that prosecutors may need to prove intent under Supreme Court precedent governing true threats.
Van Drew underscored that the legal question centers on the boundary between free speech and criminal conduct.
“There’s a real issue here,” he said, “where does the freedom of speech stop and terroristic threats begin? We’re going to find out because it’s going to be a court case.”
The congressman also criticized what he described as increasingly heated political rhetoric nationwide.
“Go into people’s districts and see some of what’s going on during these demonstrations,” Van Drew said.
He added that public discourse has deteriorated, citing extreme accusations and inflammatory language directed at elected officials.
“We in leadership, those of us who are in Congress, should be an example,” he stated. “We should be above that. We should do better than that.”
Van Drew said the allegations against Comey are particularly troubling given his former position as head of the FBI.
“It’s especially disturbing when you see an FBI director, one of the most powerful people on the face of the earth, misusing that power,” he remarked.
He noted that investigators and courts must now determine whether Comey’s conduct could have caused harm.
“Now we have to find out if he’s misusing it again and really could cause somebody harm or death,” Van Drew said.
Ultimately, Van Drew stated that the decision rests with the judiciary.
“Those are for the judicial minds and judges,” he added, expressing hope for “fair and honest objective judges.”
Still, he sharply criticized Comey’s actions regardless of the legal outcome.
“At the worst, it was a terroristic threat,” Van Drew said. “At the best, it was a reckless abandonment of his authority and former position.”
