EXCLUSIVE: FBI Interviewed Sammy 'The Bull' Gravano During Probe Into James Comey's '86 47' Seashell Post
Federal court filings claim the FBI interviewed former mobster Sammy 'The Bull' Gravano while investigating James Comey’s controversial '86 47' Instagram post.
July 29 2026, Published 6:26 p.m. ET
Former FBI Director James Comey's legal battle over his controversial "86 47" seashell post has taken another turn, with newly filed court documents revealing federal investigators interviewed infamous mobster Sammy 'The Bull' Gravano as they tried to determine whether the phrase carried an organized crime meaning, RadarOnline.com can exclusively reveal.
According to a memorandum filed in federal court and exclusively obtained by Radar, Comey's attorneys claim the FBI questioned Gravano – the former Gambino crime family underboss who became one of the government's most famous cooperating witnesses – during its investigation into whether "86" could be interpreted as Mafia code for murder.
FBI Questioned Infamous Mafia Mobster
FBI questioned Gravano if '86' could be interpreted as Mafia code for murder.
The filing alleges agents interviewed Gravano in May 2026 after a grand jury indicted Comey over the Instagram post, which prosecutors contend amounted to a threat against President Donald Trump.
Comey's defense argues investigators expanded the probe in an effort to connect the Ex-FBI director to an alleged organized crime meaning of the phrase.
According to the filing, Gravano told investigators he did not recall ever discussing the term "86" with Comey or hearing it used in connection with him.
'A Gangster Would Never Use That Term'
Comey has consistently denied intending to threaten President Donald Trump.
The defense also claims Gravano said while law enforcement officers may recognize an alternate organized crime interpretation of the term, "a gangster would never use that term" because mobsters would know police understood its alleged meaning.
The filing further alleges Gravano did not interpret Comey's now-deleted seashell Instagram post as a personal threat to carry out violence.
Comey has consistently denied intending to threaten Trump, maintaining he believed the shells arranged to read "86 47" reflected political opposition rather than a call for violence.
Sammy 'The Bull' Gravano Didn't Find '86 47' a Threat
Gravano told investigators he did not recall ever discussing the term '86' with Comey.
He removed the post after learning some people viewed the phrase differently and has repeatedly said violence "never occurred" to him.
The revelations are contained in Comey's sweeping motion asking a federal judge to dismiss the criminal case, in which he accuses the government of vindictive and selective prosecution.
His attorneys argue the Justice Department improperly pursued charges because of Trump's longstanding criticism of Comey and claim investigators stretched to support their theory that the social media post constituted a criminal threat.
Former Judge Backs James Comey's Defense
Never Miss an
Daily updates from the heart of Hollywood, right to your inbox
By entering your email and clicking Sign Up, you’re agreeing to let us send you customized marketing messages about us and our advertising partners. You are also agreeing to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
The court has not ruled on Comey's request to dismiss the indictment.
The filing also details what the defense characterizes as an extensive investigation into the phrase's possible organized crime origins, including interviews with Mafia figures and expert witnesses, as prosecutors sought to establish that "86" could be understood as a reference to killing someone.
The defense also bolstered its argument with an expert affidavit from former U.S. District Judge and veteran Mafia prosecutor John Gleeson, who said his decades of prosecuting organized crime taught him mobsters typically use words such as "whack," "clip," "kill," and "pieces of work" – not "86" – when referring to murder.
Gleeson called the government's theory "preposterous" and concluded there is "literally no support" for its central allegation.
Federal prosecutors have not yet responded to the latest motion, and the court has not ruled on Comey's request to dismiss the indictment.
