They are dumbshits, the administration said they were threats… so they believe they were threats…
Waaaaaa, Comey used seashells to post 86/47, I’m so scared.
I hope justice will be served. Bye bye Comey
- Thread starter Teflon Don
- Start date
Waaaaaa, Comey used seashells to post 86/47, I’m so scared.
One more time for one of the most relentless morons on JPP.
Here's are the only things I wanted to share with JPP about this case while we're in this state of limbo without all the facts of the case available. I'm thrilled that he was arrested. I hope he goes broke defending himself. I hope he gets convicted. I hope they have much more to share that puts him in jail. I think he's a disgusting scumbag that deserves every bit of it and much more.
None of that is up for debate. Why? Those hopes are my feelings and what I think, not yours. The facts of the case are not available yet. I'm fully aware of what your feelings are. They are the same as every simpleton on JPP. Are you capable of understanding this?
It's ok Dicky, you can calm down and relax. I'm not trying to take away your feelings or what you call 'facts.' You can have them, you can post your facts/feelings all you want. There are plenty of fellow morons to agree with you and they will share their libtard tears with you all day long. They'll have no problem believing you when you say all your concerned with are the facts and the law, they are morons after all.
Time will tell. Now, repeat yourself again and get all those icky libtard feeling out of your system one more time, I'll let it go unanswered for you. I hope it helps.
Look into it, Comey is independently very wealthy. He is getting so many donations I bet this "prosecution" will help him even grow his bottom line even further.
If this is such a strong case, why did they first try on the silly perjury case?
You never disappoint. When you want a libtard moron to chime in, here comes Jarod. The perjury case was just as obvious as this one. The DOJ 'tried' because nobody is above the law and the left's favorite cop lied in front of the whole world under oath. The case was thrown out on a bullshit procedural 'mistake' by a libtard judge, you simpleton. That case is under appeal, it's not over yet, you moron.
It amazes me how a libtard can watch a crime take place in front of them and claim it's not a crime if they the accused is useful to the cause. Comey lied under oath in front of Congress and the whole planet. Then Comey threatened the President in front of the whole world which is illegal. Again, nobody is above the law. Millions of drones like you saw the threat and immediately knew what it meant as Comey being the top cop knew all too well, and yet, the libtards pretends otherwise.
The only argument you idiots have including your fellow drone, Dicky, is Comey didn't know what it meant. Of course, only an actual retard would believe that. My guess? They have evidence that he did. Time will tell.
Grim Reaper
Chief Exit Officer (CEO)
This isn’t an argument anymore, it’s you foaming at the mouth and hurling every insult you can reach because you’ve got nothing else left in the tank. You’re stacking slurs like Jenga blocks, hoping nobody notices there’s zero actual reasoning underneath. All that rage, all that noise, and somehow you still haven’t produced a single coherent point. If volume counted as evidence, you’d be a genius, but it doesn’t, and here we are.
1) the original Comey case is not under appeal, its dead, they let the deadlines pass.
2) It could possibly be a crime if you could prove that Comey posted that with intent to physically threaten The PP, but the term "86" has a multitude of meanings that fall far short of that. I guess if Comey were to testify that in his mind he was hoping to incite some violence against the PP, it would be a crime. Plenty of people have done much, much worse and it was passed on by prosecutors. If The PP did not want revenge this case would never ever have been filed.
3) Again, "86" has many meanings. It was not a true threat. Its protected speech, but it is also clear selective prosecution, something very hard to prove but in this case I believe it is likely to be proveable. I predict the judge this was assigned to will have the guts to dismiss it, I understand she has a history of "not suffering fools".
QP!
Verified User
If a restaurant term that means to 'get rid of' can be declared a threat by magats because as Trump says 'that is how it is used in Mob movies' and that is enough to declare they can read his mind and Comey meant it the mob movie way and not the more common restaurant way then all of these words also coopted by mob movies would be crimes to say in relation to Trump:
------------------------
Here is a short list of words that Mob movies later spun via their own slang for 'kill':
So anyone who says 'someone please take care of Trump' is also committing a crime if a magat declares 'i can read their mind and they meant kill and not grab him another McD's cheeseburger'.
------------------------
Here is a short list of words that Mob movies later spun via their own slang for 'kill':
- “Waste”
- “Take care of”
- “Hit”
- “Off” (as in “off him”)
- “Put down”
- “Drop”
- “Neutralize”
- “Terminate”
- “Smoke”
- “Ice”
- “Cancel”
So anyone who says 'someone please take care of Trump' is also committing a crime if a magat declares 'i can read their mind and they meant kill and not grab him another McD's cheeseburger'.
Grim Reaper
Chief Exit Officer (CEO)
Getting 86’d on your favorite dish feels personal. You ask for it and the server hits you with Oh… we’re out of that like they’re delivering a terminal diagnosis. Out of it? Bro, that was my emotional support entrée. At this point just bring me a glass of water and a fork so I can quietly mourn what could’ve been.
QP!
Verified User
Even if Comey said "i was angry at the time and was not thinking as i wrote that threat" (admitting he was thinking of kill) this still would not be a viable case to prosecute. That is how high the free speech bar is on instances like this.
There are two core Supreme Court cases, Virginia v. Black, and WATTS v. United States, where the SC made it clear that to over come Free speech rights there must be 'immediacy in some form of call to action that is directing in its nature' and not a vague threatening tone with no clear immediate call to action by any identified actor or group.
In Watts v United States the person was protesting any potential imposition of the Draft and said if 'forced to carry a gun the first person he would shoot is the POTUS'. A clear threat that if a draft is imposed on what his action would be. But as it was not specific and only spoke to a 'potential' the SC ruled it was protected free speech.
The very FACT that the DoJ and FBI and Secret Service who did the investigation, a year prior on the seashells, and did not charge Comey then, provides fact they saw no IMMEDIACY in the whatever threat the DoJ now claims to perceive.
They could never over come that bar in court if Comey's lawyers presented it as a defense but this case will be dismissed on other factors well before they even have to make that argument.
QP!
Verified User
Yup.
Michael Smerconish, a center right Radio host and podcaster, said a week before this mess broke out that exact thing happened to him and his wife when out at a restaurant. She had a favorite dish she had had prior at that restaurant and when she tried to order it again the waiter apologized while telling her 'the restaurant 86'd that item a few weeks back in a menu refresh'.
Oh boy, Jerry, the wannabe lawyer is back again.
Sorry moron, the case was not dismissed on merit, it never made it to day one of the trial. The case was dismissed on procedural grounds, as I said with a bit more colorful language. The libtard judge's ruling has been appealed. If DOJ wins the 4th Circuit appeal: The dismissal is reversed, the original indictment is reinstated, and the perjury case against Comey proceeds to trial, dumbass.
You have to know what to ask AI if you don't want to be embarrassed like you are now. Numbers 2 and 3 are nothing buy your feelings coupled with some obvious generic facts about these kinds of cases. Congrats, you're a good parrot and a horrible AI user.
For the last time. Right now, all either side has is feelings, unless you're privy to the DOJ's case file, and you're not. I've expressed mine. I already know all of the dumbass drone's feelings, so why do you idiots continue crying out loud? You're not even smart enough to figure out if the case there's an active appeal or not. How stupid are you?? No need to answer, we all know the answer.
1) The Justice Department did not appeal the rejected indictment.
2) what about when The PP posted a photo of Biden tied up in the bed of a MAGA Truck?
Umm, dumbass, you can say they didn't appeal the case that was thrown out all day, but as I told you they have appealed the procedural ruling. If they win that appeal, the case begins where it ended, at the very beginning, like the libtard judge never existed.
The DOJ appealed the November 2025 procedural ruling dismissing James Comey's case (and Letitia James's) due to the unlawful appointment of prosecutor Lindsey Halligan. Notices of appeal were filed in December 2025 to the Fourth Circuit. ACCORDING TO POLITICO. I thought you'd be able to handle this information if it came from a libtard outlet. Don't cry, you should be very familiar with being wrong, this is just one more example, just another Tuesday for a moron. It sucks being wrong, but you have to just move on and lick your wounds, or you keep just stay in denial like you've been doing.
Number 2, lol. What about it? Is this the best your PP's (Pathetic Puppet-masters) came up with?
Jarod, again. I don't care about your feelings, you know mine, I know yours, time will tell. Now, go have a good cry and 86 this pathetic whiny denial.
This is not about feelings, and a notice of intent to appeal is not the same thing as actually filing an appeal.
Are you really that dumb?
OMG, How dumb am I? Should you be asking that question after I've thoroughly embarrassed you? I know you're in denial, but your commitment to denial is really impressive. A much better question. How many times will you deny that you're an idiot? Is the case dead? No, not until and if the current appeal is denied. That's not up for debate, it's called reality.
Once again: The DOJ appealed the November 2025 procedural ruling dismissing James Comey's case (and Letitia James's) due to the unlawful appointment of prosecutor Lindsey Halligan. Notices of appeal were filed in December 2025 to the Fourth Circuit. What happens if they win that appeal?? Answer: The trial moves forward.
That piece of shit should be in jail right now.
A notice of intent is not an appeal. I just looked up the rule, you have 14 days after notice to actually file the appeal. It is now time barred, no appeal right exists. You are incorrect, no appeal has been filed and any further action is barred since its been 14 days.
There's the problem, 'you looked it up' I've told you many times, you're not smart enough to look things up. Go get your nurse or your adult supervisor or whoever can help you. Have them look it up. Tell them to copy and paste the following comment into their favorite AI and ask the very simple question. Is this true. When you get the answer, come back and let me know what your helper told you. In the meantime, I'll continue on with my day knowing what I've known all along. Jarod is a radicalized libtard drone moron. All anyone needs to do is follow this exchange if they don't believe me.
This is the part you need to ask someone to copy/paste
DOJ filed the actual Notice of Appeal on Dec 19, 2025 (docket 25-4674), within the 30-day window for government criminal appeals. It's fully active—briefs filed (gov't Feb 2026), case consolidated and pending in Fourth Circuit. Not time-barred.