BUSTED: Twice-Indicted Ex-FBI Chief Uses National TV to Organize…

James Comey went on NBC’s Meet the Press last Sunday and said the quiet part out loud.

The disgraced former FBI director, currently awaiting trial on a second federal indictment involving a social media post widely interpreted as a reference to the assassination of President Trump, told the viewing audience that he was urging the people he still considers his people inside the federal government to hang on, wait out the Trump administration, and then rebuild the institutions from the inside once the president is gone.

By Monday, the president had heard enough.

The response that followed was the most direct and unambiguous statement of intent toward the deep state that Donald Trump has ever publicly delivered.

“If they’re there, we’re gonna SEEK THEM OUT and get RID of them,” Trump declared, referring to embedded bureaucratic resisters operating inside the federal agencies.

“In every agency, YOU HAVE SCUM. They did at FBI, DOJ.”

He added:

“WE WILL PREVAIL. I’ve been standing here a long time with you, many years. They keep saying, I think that’s it. Yet, here I am.”

What prompted that response was Comey’s own words on national television.

“I’m urging them, hang on two and a half years, and then we can rebuild these institutions,” Comey said, speaking directly to the career prosecutors and agents he believes are still embedded in the Justice Department and FBI, waiting for Trump’s term to end.

It was an extraordinary statement from a man who has been indicted twice, who currently faces federal felony charges, and who was fired from the FBI directorship by the very president he is now publicly organizing resistance against.

What Comey delivered on Meet the Press was not commentary.

It was a strategy session conducted on national television, aimed at the people inside the government who are willing to act as his surrogates while he fights his legal battles from the outside.

Comey’s appearance on Meet the Press came as he faces a second federal indictment involving two felony counts centered on his 2025 Instagram post depicting seashells in the sand that read “86 47,” a widely understood reference to the assassination of the nation’s 47th president, Donald Trump.

The man delivering a morale-boosting message to government resisters is not a neutral civic figure commenting on institutional health.

He is a twice-indicted former law enforcement official who posted what many interpreted as a call for the president’s assassination and who is now on television urging federal employees to defy the administration’s direction.

Comey made his defiant posture explicit on the program:

“If you’re bragging about forcing out career prosecutors and agents because the president doesn’t like a lawful investigation they conducted, something is seriously broken at the top.”

That framing is a deliberate inversion of the actual situation.

The Trump administration is not removing career prosecutors because it dislikes lawful investigations.

It is removing personnel who were identified as having participated in investigations that the administration has credibly argued were politically motivated, legally deficient, and conducted in violation of standard DOJ procedures.

The distinction matters, and Comey knows it matters, which is precisely why he frames the issue as he does.

Comey’s NBC appearance was not the only signal of organized resistance coming from the former intelligence community that week.

Former CIA Director John Brennan appeared on MSNBC and confirmed that there is a “legion” of operatives in the DOJ and CIA who are refusing to follow what he called politically motivated prosecutions.

Brennan said those individuals are refusing to support any type of political activities on the part of the Trump administration.

That description, delivered by the former director of the Central Intelligence Agency, is not a whistleblower account of government misconduct.

It is a public admission that organized institutional resistance to a duly elected president’s administration exists inside the American intelligence and law enforcement apparatus.

Brennan offered it without apparent concern for what it implied.

The combination of Comey’s public pep talk and Brennan’s open acknowledgment of a resistance “legion” gave the president a clear and documented basis for the response he delivered.

These were not anonymous sources claiming that some federal employees were dragging their feet on administration priorities.

These were named, prominent former intelligence officials publicly describing and encouraging a coordinated effort to obstruct the direction of the executive branch from within.

Trump’s vow to seek out and remove those individuals is not a threat of political persecution.

It is a statement of basic managerial authority over the executive branch that the Constitution vests in the president.

The history behind this confrontation stretches back to Trump’s first term, when the existence of institutionalized resistance to his administration first became publicly documented through leaked internal communications, anonymous op-eds in major newspapers, and the sustained campaign to use the FISA surveillance apparatus against his campaign and transition team.

The Russia collusion investigation, which produced no charges related to the central allegation and which the Durham report subsequently documented as having been opened on insufficient grounds, was the most visible manifestation of what the administration has always characterized as a politically motivated use of federal law enforcement power.

What is different in the second term is that the documentation of that resistance is no longer dependent on leaked information or whistleblower accounts.

Comey is doing it on NBC.

Brennan is doing it on MSNBC.

The former directors of the FBI and CIA are openly acknowledging the existence of an organized internal resistance to the Trump administration and urging it to continue.

That level of transparency about the nature of the deep state’s operations is historically unprecedented, and it has given the administration an evidentiary basis for its response that it did not have in the first term.

The legal situation surrounding Comey himself underscores the stakes of what he is doing.

His first federal indictment, involving allegations that he made false statements to Congress and obstructed a congressional proceeding connected to his testimony about FBI activities, was dismissed by a Clinton-appointed federal judge on what the administration characterized as a technicality involving the prosecuting attorney’s appointment status.

The second indictment, involving the “86 47” Instagram post, remains active.

Attorney General Pam Bondi vowed to appeal the dismissal of the first case and confirmed the administration is exploring all available options to keep both matters alive.

FBI Director Kash Patel has been equally direct about the administration’s intentions toward those who believe they can outlast Trump.

His response to the first indictment’s dismissal was crisp and without self-pity:

“The judicial process can make whatever determination it wants, but we at the FBI and our partners at the DOJ have numerous options to proceed, and we’re executing on all those options.”

That is the statement of an agency leadership that views the accountability project as ongoing rather than concluded.

The court’s ruling dismissed a case on procedural grounds.

It did not exonerate anyone or extinguish the administration’s authority to pursue accountability through other legal channels.

For the millions of Americans who have watched the federal bureaucracy treat the Trump administration as an obstacle to be managed rather than a legitimate government to be served, the president’s vow to seek out and remove the embedded resisters represents a long-delayed and overdue assertion of democratic accountability.

The civil service is a legitimate institution with important functions.

It is not a permanent government with the authority to override the elected one.

The distinction between these two things has been blurred to the point of disappearance by the Comeys and Brennans of the intelligence community, who appear to believe that their professional judgment entitles them to nullify election outcomes they find objectionable.

The practical challenge of identifying and removing embedded resisters from within a federal workforce of over two million people is genuinely difficult.

Career civil service protections, union agreements, and the sheer size of the bureaucratic apparatus create significant procedural obstacles to rapid personnel action.

The administration has made meaningful progress through Schedule F, which reclassified certain policy-relevant civil service positions to make them more easily replaceable, and through the DOGE efficiency initiative, which has reduced headcount in agencies identified as harboring institutional resistance.

But the process is slow, contested in courts, and politically costly in ways that the bureaucracy has learned to exploit.

What Trump’s public statement Monday accomplished was something different and perhaps more strategically valuable than any specific personnel action.

It told the people Comey was addressing in his NBC appearance that the administration knows they are there, that it intends to find them, and that believing they can simply wait out the clock on this presidency is a miscalculation they will come to regret.

The message was delivered at full volume, without diplomatic softening, and with the specific language that Comey’s own appearance had earned: scum.