What's Happening?
The FBI has interviewed former Gambino crime family underboss Salvatore 'Sammy the Bull' Gravano as part of an investigation into whether former FBI Director James Comey intended to threaten President Trump with an Instagram post. The post featured seashells
arranged as '86 47,' interpreted by the Justice Department as a threat against Trump, the 47th president. Comey, who was indicted in April, claims he understood '86' to mean removing or getting rid of something, not a threat of violence. Gravano informed investigators that while law enforcement might recognize a violent meaning of '86,' it is unlikely to be used by mobsters. Comey's defense argues that the term is not recognized as mob jargon for murder, undermining the prosecution's case.
Why It's Important?
The case against Comey highlights the complexities of interpreting intent in legal proceedings, especially when involving high-profile figures. The use of a former mobster as a witness underscores the lengths to which investigators are going to establish intent. The outcome of this case could have implications for how threats are interpreted and prosecuted, particularly in the context of social media and public figures. It also raises questions about the balance between free expression and perceived threats in political discourse.
What's Next?
Comey's trial is scheduled for October 21, where the prosecution will present evidence to establish intent. The defense is likely to challenge the interpretation of '86' and the methods used by investigators, including the legality of tracking Comey's cellphone. The court's decision could set a precedent for future cases involving alleged threats against public officials. The Justice Department will need to provide compelling evidence to support its claims, while Comey's defense will aim to demonstrate the lack of intent to threaten.
