James Comey’s anti-Trump derangement jut hit a new low with dangerous post

New York Post - May 16th, 2025

Former FBI Director James Comey has stirred controversy with an Instagram post featuring a shell arrangement that spells '8647,' interpreted by many as a threat against Donald Trump, the 47th president. Comey captioned the image as a 'cool shell formation,' but the post was met with backlash. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem stated that both her department and the Secret Service are investigating the matter. Comey claims innocence, suggesting he found the shells arranged this way during a beach walk, yet acknowledged a political undertone, raising questions about his intent and mental clarity.

The incident adds to Comey's contentious history, which includes the handling of Hillary Clinton's email investigation and involvement in the RussiaGate controversy. Critics argue that this could be a publicity stunt linked to his upcoming thriller, 'FDR Drive,' which focuses on themes of criminalizing speech. The implications of this post are significant, highlighting the sensitivity of political symbolism and the potential consequences for public figures engaging in such actions. The situation underscores the ongoing tension between Comey and Trump, reflecting broader political divides in the U.S.

Donald Trump Homeland Security Secret Service James Comey Instagram Controversy Political Symbolism Fdr Drive Book

Story submitted by Fairstory

RATING

3.4

Unfair Story

Approach with caution

The article presents a sensational and controversial account of James Comey's Instagram post, but it lacks factual accuracy and balance. While it captures attention and engages readers, the speculative nature of its claims and the absence of credible sources undermine its reliability. The story effectively highlights issues of public interest, such as political violence and free speech, but its impact is limited by the lack of evidence and transparency. The article's potential to provoke debate is significant, yet it must consider ethical responsibilities in reporting. Overall, the story's strengths lie in its timeliness and engagement, while its weaknesses are evident in its accuracy and balance.

Accuracy

The story presents several claims that require verification. The claim that James Comey posted a photo of shells arranged to spell "8647" is accurate, as it is supported by external sources. However, the interpretation of the numbers as a call for violence against Donald Trump is speculative and not definitively proven. The article also states that Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem announced an investigation, which is correct, but it does not provide detailed evidence of Comey's intent. The story's assertion that Comey's actions were a publicity stunt for his book is conjectural and lacks supporting evidence. Overall, while some factual elements are present, many claims are speculative and need further verification.

Balance

The story lacks balance, presenting a predominantly negative view of James Comey. It characterizes him as deranged and accuses him of using the post for publicity without considering alternative explanations. The article does not provide Comey's perspective or any defense he might have offered, leading to a one-sided narrative. Important viewpoints, such as potential misunderstandings or alternative interpretations of the post, are omitted. This imbalance suggests a strong bias against Comey, limiting the article's objectivity.

Clarity

The article is written in a clear and straightforward manner, with a strong tone that conveys its critical stance on Comey. However, the language used is emotionally charged and lacks neutrality, which may affect the reader's perception of the information. The structure is logical, but the lack of balanced viewpoints and evidence detracts from the overall clarity of the article. While the main points are easy to understand, the speculative nature of the claims can lead to confusion about the factual basis of the story.

Source quality

The article does not cite any credible sources or provide evidence to support its claims. It relies heavily on speculative assertions without attributing information to authoritative sources or experts. The lack of diverse and reliable sources undermines the article's credibility. Additionally, the absence of direct quotes or statements from Comey or involved parties further detracts from the reliability of the reporting.

Transparency

The article lacks transparency, as it does not disclose the basis for its claims or the methodology used to interpret Comey's actions. There is no explanation of how the conclusions were reached or what evidence supports them. The article does not reveal any potential conflicts of interest or biases that may have influenced its perspective. This lack of transparency makes it difficult for readers to assess the impartiality and reliability of the information presented.