Imagine a former Coast Guard officer turned self-proclaimed Antifa supporter allegedly plotting to assassinate President Donald Trump, all while echoing a cryptic message from a disgraced FBI director’s social media misstep. That’s the alarming reality unfolding in Northern Virginia, where Peter Stinson now faces federal charges for graphic threats against the president. It’s a case that’s got law enforcement on edge and reignited a firestorm over the influence of reckless online rhetoric.
According to Fox News, this story centers on Stinson’s arrest for multiple violent threats against Trump, a case FBI Director Kash Patel ties partly to a provocative Instagram post by former FBI Director James Comey.
Let’s rewind to February 2024, when Stinson, a Coast Guard veteran of over three decades with sharpshooter and FEMA instructor credentials, posted on X about war, drawn sides, and the supposed need for violence. “Sure. This is war,” he wrote, setting a chilling tone.
Fast forward to June 11, 2024, and Stinson allegedly escalated with a menacing BlueSky post about Trump’s demise, quipping, “When he dies, the party is going to be yuge.” That’s not just distasteful—it’s a blatant threat, and one wonders how such rhetoric festers unchecked on these platforms. It’s a stark reminder of how digital bravado can cross into dangerous territory.
Stinson didn’t stop there, also referencing the July 13, 2024, assassination attempt on Trump in Butler, Pennsylvania, with a post criticizing Secret Service response. “They left him in the open way too long,” he sneered, calling it a “missed opportunity.” Such words aren’t just commentary; they’re a playbook for chaos.
Amidst this timeline, in May 2024, former FBI Director James Comey entered the fray with an Instagram photo of shells arranged as “86 47,” a post he quickly deleted after backlash. Merriam-Webster defines “86” as a term meaning to discard or eliminate, and critics—including Trump himself—picked up on the implication with him as the 47th president, which prompted the Secret Service to interview Comey.
Yet, Comey shrugs it off, saying, “It’s hard to have regret about something that… looks totally innocent.”
Innocent? Tell that to the FBI agents Patel says were pulled from critical duties to handle a flood of copycat threats inspired by Comey’s stunt. Patel minced no words, stating, “When former Director Comey first pulled his destructive Instagram stunt, it forced the FBI to pull numerous agents off of critical portfolios.”
Stinson, it seems, latched onto this “86 47” phrase, referencing it 13 times in his threats against Trump, per court documents. While some of his menacing posts predate Comey’s, the overlap raises eyebrows about how far a poorly judged social media moment can ripple. It’s not about pinning all blame on Comey—Stinson’s choices are his own—but it’s a cautionary tale about responsibility in the digital age.
Patel didn’t hold back on the severity, noting, “This is a guy who threatened President Trump’s life using the ‘86 47’ language.” That connection isn’t just coincidental; it’s a symptom of how inflammatory ideas can embolden the unhinged. We’re not talking harmless memes here—this is life-and-death stuff.
Thankfully, law enforcement stepped up, with Patel affirming, “Thankfully, law enforcement did excellent work preventing a potential violent actor.” It’s a small comfort in a case he called “tragically… predictable,” given the climate of hostility stoked by careless online behavior. Kudos to the agents who caught this before it turned uglier.
Attorney General Pam Bondi echoed that resolve, declaring, “This defendant is charged with threatening the life of our President – a man who has already survived two deranged attempts on his life.” Her follow-up was just as firm: “The Department of Justice takes these threats with the utmost seriousness.” That’s the kind of backbone needed when the stakes are this high.
Stinson, hailing from Northern Virginia, now faces his first federal court appearance on Wednesday, June 18, 2025. It’s unclear how much Comey’s post or the surrounding media frenzy influenced him, but the overlap in language is undeniable. The courtroom will hopefully shed light on what drove this former public servant down such a dark path.
This isn’t an isolated incident, as news of Stinson’s arrest comes on the heels of another federal indictment in San Bernardino County, California, against a man for similar threats against Trump after his reelection in 2024. It’s a sobering pattern, one that demands we rethink how words—online or otherwise—can weaponize intent. We can’t afford to dismiss these as mere rants.
What’s the takeaway here? While Comey isn’t under investigation and may never have intended harm, his flippant post contributed to a toxic echo chamber that folks like Stinson apparently tuned into. It’s not about silencing speech but recognizing that influence carries weight, especially from someone of his former stature.
Finally, let’s not lose sight of the bigger fight—protecting our leaders from real danger while navigating a culture that too often glorifies outrage over reason. Cases like Stinson’s, fueled by divisive rhetoric from all sides, remind us that words aren’t just words when they inspire threats. If we’re serious about safety, it’s time to dial down the digital venom and hold everyone accountable, from ex-officials to everyday posters.
