The defense argued that the government's application of the statute misconstrues common language and legal precedents regarding political commentary.
"But the government now singles out Mr. Comey to prosecute one of the President's most prominent critics for publishing another person's statement of political opposition," the lawyers wrote.
Attorneys insisted that every standard reference source undermines the government's reading of the photo as an assassination threat.
"That claim is contradicted by every possible source of meaning: dictionaries, context, precedent, and common sense," they wrote.
Defense filings noted that the term carries no inherent violent meaning in common English usage.
"'86' simply means 'get rid of' or 'eject' and has no violent connotation except in the most uncommon usages," the lawyers stated.
The legal team added that combining the two numbers merely creates an explicit statement of political dissent.
"Most dictionaries do not even list the meaning — 'to kill' — that the government now proposes.
And when combined with '47' — slang for President Trump — '86' becomes nothing more than a call to oppose President Trump," the attorneys said.
Comey's attorneys maintained that forced prosecution creates unconstitutional consequences regardless of the verdict.
"Forcing Mr. Comey to stand trial for a statement opposing the President — even if he is ultimately acquitted — would itself be an unconstitutional punishment of free speech," they wrote.
The motion warned that prosecuting opposition statements invites systemic retaliation by the Executive Branch against perceived political enemies.
>>> Kelda Roys Outlines Platform for Wisconsin Gubernatorial Primary
