成人X站

Disgraced former FBI Director James Comey posted a photo of seashells spelling out 鈥�86 47.鈥� After blowback, considering it’s a clear comment about violence against President Donald Trump, who nearly died from an assassination attempt, Comey deleted it. He claimed that while he thought it was political, he didn’t know “86” referenced violence.

Left-wing media shrugged it off and pushed the lazy narrative that conservatives are overreacting and pretending this was a threat.

When then-candidate Donald Trump criticized “war hawk” Liz Cheney for pushing wars, suggesting she wouldn’t be so quick to start armed conflict if she was the one standing there with guns pointed at her, the left-wing press exploded. They framed it as an explicit call for a firing squad.

Where鈥檚 the consistency?

James Comey on ’86 47′ controversy

On May 15, Comey shared an Instagram post captioned 鈥淐ool shell formation on my beach walk,鈥� showing shells arranged to read 鈥�86 47鈥� 鈥� slang for 鈥済et rid of鈥� and, in some circles, 鈥渒ill鈥� the 47th president. Soon, Secret Service and DHS investigations were underway, with Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem calling it a 鈥渢hreat鈥� that 鈥渨ill respond appropriately.”

Comey鈥檚 dishonest defense? He 鈥渄idn鈥檛 realize some folks associate it with violence,鈥� and, being 鈥渙pposed to violence in all circumstances,鈥� he took it down. This is, of course, a nonsense claim. He posted a message he thought was political, but didn’t understand what “86” meant in this context?

What did he聽迟丑颈苍办听it meant? Comey doesn’t explain. One suspects that as a one-time FBI director, he鈥檇 at least have Google. Are we supposed to pretend he came upon this and didn’t do it at the time? I guess so.

Trump supporters and conservative media expressed outrage. Left-wing media focused on the outrage, not Comey’s conduct.

Muted coverage

笔辞濒颈迟颈肠辞听 the story not around Comey’s conduct, but the聽reaction from concerned Republicans. It noted three paragraphs in which Republicans were simply “interpreting the numbers ’86’ as suggesting he should be killed, though the phrase means ‘eject, dismiss or remove’ or ‘get rid of’ someone in the Merriam-Webster Dictionary.” Like Comey, 笔辞濒颈迟颈肠辞听reporter Gregory Svirnovskiy is pretending that “86” has never meant to kill.

Similarly, CNN that Comey simply “takes down Instagram post after conservative uproar.”

Trump: Liz Cheney wouldn’t be comfortable sending Americans to war if she had guns pointed at her like they would.

Left-wing Media: TRUMP WANTS TO SEND CHENEY TO A FIRING SQUAD!!!

Comey: 86 47!

Left-wing Media: HE WAS JUST POSTING POWERBALL NUMBERS!!!

鈥� Jason Rantz on KTTH Radio (@jasonrantz)

But then there’s Donald Trump vs. Liz Cheney

Contrast “86 47” coverage with Trump鈥檚 rally in Glendale, Arizona last November, when he noted that Cheney wouldn鈥檛 be so eager to send Americans to war if she were in the same position as our troops.

Left-wing outlets didn鈥檛 just blast the remark; they painted it as a clear-cut execution threat.

Violent rhetoric!

笔辞濒颈迟颈肠辞听 their coverage that Trump “reverts to violent rhetoric.” It claimed, in the first paragraph, that Trump “cast a menacing new shadow over the final days of the presidential race, stoking fresh backlash against the former president鈥檚 frequent and increasingly violent threats targeting political opponents.”

And, again, CNN followed suit, falsely claiming in the that Trump said “Liz Cheney should be fired upon in escalation of violent rhetoric against his opponents.” This simply didn’t happen.

Consistency? Not with Trump coverage

Left-wing media is simply unwilling, and perhaps unable, to treat Trump the way they treat his opponents.

Truly broken people are covering the news and, consequently, they aren’t sensitive to violent rhetoric around the man who faced two assassination attempts, and was millimeters away from death, because they hate him.

But if Trump makes a comment that they can willfully take out of context to make him seem violent, they’ll take that opportunity and run with it.

For what it’s worth, I think Comey was normalizing a joke about violence against Trump. He wasn’t calling for violence, he was making light of it, even though he knows Trump was millimeters away from being assassinated. Like the left-wing media outlets providing cover for him, Comey is a broken man desperate for attention and avenues to express his disdain for Trump. It wasn’t criminal; it was criminally despicable and in bad taste.

Pick a lane

If they’re going to treat veiled threats as mortal sins (or take unthreatening comments out of context to pretend otherwise), that standard has to apply across the board.

The blood-curdling op-eds accusing Trump of paving the way for firing squads didn鈥檛 demand nuance; they demanded outrage. But when it鈥檚 one of their heroes tossing the word 鈥�86鈥� around, it鈥檚 just 鈥渂each vibes鈥� and 鈥渕isunderstood slang.鈥澛燭he real story here isn鈥檛 that Comey didn鈥檛 know what 鈥�86 47鈥� meant; it鈥檚 that the media pretends not to notice when one of their own does it.

So here鈥檚 a proposal: pick a lane.

Listen to The Jason Rantz Show on weekday afternoons from 3 p.m. -7 p.m. on KTTH 770 AM (HD Radio 97.3 FM HD-Channel 3). Subscribe to the聽podcast here. Follow Jason Rantz on聽,听,听, and聽.