Trump says Comey knew 'assassination' meaning behind deleted social media post

Fox News - May 17th, 2025

In a recent interview on Fox News, President Donald Trump addressed a controversial social media post by former FBI Director James Comey, which Trump interpreted as a veiled call for his assassination. The post featured a photo of seashells arranged to form the numbers '86 47,' which some interpreted as a coded message suggesting 'get rid of' Trump, the 47th president. Comey has since deleted the post and apologized, stating he was unaware of its violent connotations. Trump remains skeptical and has called for investigations by the Justice Department and the U.S. Secret Service, criticizing Comey's past conduct as a 'dirty cop.'

During the interview, Trump also highlighted his recent foreign policy efforts, including brokering a ceasefire between India and Pakistan and securing major investment deals from Middle Eastern countries. He criticized the Biden administration's handling of the region and suggested that his trade strategies could lead to peaceful resolutions with nations like Iran. Additionally, Trump discussed ongoing investigations into assassination attempts against him during the 2024 campaign, expressing unease despite reassurances from officials. His statements underscore his continued focus on foreign policy and personal security as central themes in his public discourse.

Donald Trump Iran Foreign Policy Biden Administration Fox News Middle East Negotiations U.S. Secret Service Assassination Attempt India Pakistan Ceasefire James Comey

Story submitted by Fairstory

RATING

5.4

Moderately Fair

Read with skepticism

The news story presents an intriguing narrative involving high-profile figures and controversial claims. While it effectively captures attention through its focus on political drama and security concerns, it falls short in providing balanced perspectives and independent verification of key claims. The reliance on a single primary source and the lack of diverse viewpoints limit the story's reliability and depth. Despite these shortcomings, the article remains timely and relevant, addressing issues of public interest that could influence ongoing political discussions. To enhance its quality, the story would benefit from incorporating expert opinions, official statements, and a more comprehensive exploration of the topics discussed.

Accuracy

The story presents several claims that require verification, such as the interpretation of James Comey's social media post as a threat and Trump's foreign policy achievements. While the story accurately reports Trump's statements and interpretations, it lacks independent verification of these claims. For instance, the claim that "86 47" is widely understood as a coded message for assassination is not universally accepted and needs more context. Additionally, the article mentions investigations by the Justice Department and U.S. Secret Service but does not provide evidence or statements from these agencies confirming their involvement.

Balance

The article primarily presents President Trump's perspective, with limited representation of other viewpoints. James Comey's response is briefly mentioned, but the story does not explore perspectives from neutral or opposing voices, such as legal experts or political analysts. This lack of balance can lead to a skewed understanding of the events, particularly regarding the interpretation of Comey's post and the implications of Trump's foreign policy claims.

Clarity

The article is generally clear in its presentation of information, with a logical flow and straightforward language. However, the lack of detailed context and explanation for certain claims, such as the interpretation of Comey's post, may lead to confusion for readers unfamiliar with the background. The narrative is easy to follow, but the complexity of the topics discussed necessitates more in-depth exploration to enhance understanding.

Source quality

The story relies heavily on statements from President Trump and a brief mention of Comey's apology. It lacks diverse sources, such as expert opinions or official statements from the agencies reportedly investigating the matter. The reliance on a single primary source (Trump) without corroboration from other credible sources limits the story's reliability and depth.

Transparency

The article does not provide sufficient context or methodology for its claims, particularly regarding the interpretation of the "86 47" post. It lacks transparency in explaining how conclusions are drawn or how claims are verified. The absence of detailed information about the investigations or the factual basis for Trump's foreign policy achievements further diminishes transparency.