86 47

Susan Estrich
Wed, 29 Apr 2026 23:00:00 -0700
Opinion

When I was working my way through law school as a bartender, we used to "86" drinkers who caused trouble. The term has been around that long. It certainly didn't mean we meant to kill a problem drinker. It meant we cut him off — that is, stopped serving him drinks — or if he was really out of control, asked the bouncer to escort him out.

James Comey, the former FBI Director who earned President Donald Trump's permanent hatred by daring to investigate Russian efforts to influence the 2016 election, has been indicted for arranging some shells in a picture that spelled out 86 47 last May on his beach walk. He posted the picture on Instagram, with the caption, "Cool shell formation on my beach walk."

Since when is that a federal crime?
Updated: Thu Apr 30, 2026

When I was working my way through law school as a bartender, we used to "86" drinkers who caused trouble. The term has been around that long. It certainly didn't mean we meant to kill a problem drinker. It meant we cut him off — that is, stopped serving him drinks — or if he was really out of control, asked the bouncer to escort him out.

James Comey, the former FBI Director who earned President Donald Trump's permanent hatred by daring to investigate Russian efforts to influence the 2016 election, has been indicted for arranging some shells in a picture that spelled out 86 47 last May on his beach walk. He posted the picture on Instagram, with the caption, "Cool shell formation on my beach walk."

Since when is that a federal crime?

My definition is the same one you get from ChatGPT. "86" is slang that means to get rid of, eject, cancel, or refuse service to someone or something.

So:

— "86 someone" = kick them out / ban them / get rid of them

— "The bartender 86'd him" = he was thrown out or cut off

— "We're 86'ing that item" = it's removed (like from a menu)

As for the source of "86"ing, the internet says that there is no single source, but a few common theories, none of which have anything to do with assassinating the president:

— Restaurant/bar slang (most accepted): used by staff to mean an item is unavailable or a customer should be removed

— Prohibition-era code: possibly shorthand for "no more" or "don't serve"

— Military/radio shorthand: numbers used as coded instructions

So everyone who can't wait for Donald Trump's term to end, or for him to be removed from office, is a criminal?

I am no fan of James Comey. I think he treated Hillary Clinton very unfairly, to the point that it cost her the election. Heck, Trump should be grateful. But that is not his way. Vengeance defines him.

This is the second attempt by the Trump administration to punish Comey for his investigation. The first one got thrown out, having been brought by a totally inexperienced prosecutor who had been illegally appointed. Pam Bondi got fired because she wasn't aggressive enough in punishing Trump's enemies. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche certainly got the message.

"While this case is unique, and this indictment stands out because of the name of the defendant, his alleged conduct is the same kind of conduct that we will never tolerate and that we will always investigate," Blanche said at a press conference on Tuesday.

That is utterly ridiculous. Take a look at Amazon and search for 86 47. You can take your pick of hats, T-shirts, tops for women and hoodies. Does Mr. Blanche really intend to investigate all of the Amazon sellers and buyers who put 86 47 on their products, or wear them, or post pictures of their purchases? Of course not.

Comey has made clear that he will fight the charges. "I'm still innocent. I'm still not afraid," Comey said. "And I still believe in the independent federal judiciary, so let's go."

Let's go indeed. This case violates the First Amendment. The Justice Department will be unable to prove that Comey intended to assassinate the president. In fact, after Republicans raised hell about the Instagram post, Comey immediately took it down, explaining that he assumed the shells represented "a political message" but "didn't realize some folks associate those numbers with violence."

"It never occurred to me but I oppose violence of any kind so I took the post down," he wrote.

It will be thrown out by the courts. It will never even get to a jury. "This is not going anywhere. This is clearly not a punishable threat," Eugene Volokh, a senior fellow at the conservative Hoover Institution at Stanford University, told CNN. But in the meantime, it only reaffirms Trump's abuse of the judicial process. He is a small man, consumed by the desire for vengeance against a man he fired nearly ten years ago. It does not serve him well.