Todd Blanche Melts Down Defending Absurd Comey Case

Summary

---

Podcast Summary: Bulwark Takes

Episode: Todd Blanche Melts Down Defending Absurd Comey Case

Date: May 3, 2026
Host: Sam Stein
Guest: Will Salatin
Main Theme:
A critical analysis and discussion of Todd Blanche’s defense of the James Comey “seashells” prosecution—an allegedly politicized, weak legal case prompted by Trump administration pressure and undercut by dubious evidence.

---

Overview

In this episode, Sam Stein and Will Salatin break down Todd Blanche’s contentious appearance on the Sunday shows, particularly focusing on his defense of the prosecution of former FBI Director James Comey over an Instagram post. The hosts satirically highlight how Blanche, recently appointed interim Attorney General, awkwardly attempts to justify what many in legal and political circles see as a laughably flimsy, politically motivated prosecution. The conversation uses direct audio from interviews, compares legal standards across recent cases, and pokes fun at Blanche's rhetorical missteps—especially his odd assertions about restaurant ID requirements.

---

Key Discussion Points

1. Todd Blanche’s Awkward Defense of the Comey Prosecution

• Background:
  • Comey posted a photo of seashells with “8647” on Instagram. Some in conservative media claimed this meant “kill Trump.” Comey deleted the post and said it was unintentional, but 11 months later was indicted for it.
  • Todd Blanche, formerly Trump’s lawyer, now interim AG, is defending the case in media appearances.
• Critique of Blanche’s Answers:
  • Stein and Salatin highlight Blanche’s evasiveness and reliance on phrases like “rest assured” and “career” officials—a rhetorical attempt to legitimize the prosecution without offering substance.
  • Quote:
    • Will Salatin (03:46): “Sam, how many times did he say rest assured there? Like, that’s a—like that’s an answer.”
    • Sam Stein (03:59): “Nothing.”
• Notable Moment:
  • Blanche’s repeated refusal to detail evidence, claiming secrecy, versus other prosecutors who transparently present evidence (e.g., Jeanine Pirro in another case).

---

2. Comparisons to Other Legal Cases & Standards

• Contrast with Jeanine Pirro
  • Pirro, discussing a different, more serious case, was forthright and specific about evidence presented—a stark comparison to Blanche’s vagueness.
  • Quote:
    • Jeanine Pirro on CNN (04:29): “We got these videos out, Jake... so that you could see what we knew we already had. That’s what we’re about. We’re about proving the case.”
• Lack of Legal Support
  • The hosts observe that no serious conservative legal voices have defended the Comey prosecution’s merits.
  • Stein (11:21): “I haven’t seen anything for the simple reason that they’re not showing us anything. Right.”

---

3. Timing & Political Motivation

• The 11-Month Gap
  • Stein and Salatin dissect Blanche’s attempt to justify the 11-month wait as indicative of case “seriousness,” but counter that the timeline really suggests political opportunism—coinciding with Trump’s direct pressure on the previous AG (Pam Bondi) and subsequent firings and appointments.
  • Timeline Recap:
    • Trump posts a demand for prosecutions (Sept 20)
    • AG Bondi is removed, Lindsey Halligan steps in, indictment produced within days.
  • Quote:
    • Salatin (08:06): “So the result was not evidence that it was clean. The result was evidence that it was dirty.”

---

4. Insistence on Political Retribution

• Kristen Welker confronts Blanche directly about politicization, referencing Trump’s explicit public pressure to prosecute political enemies.
  • Quote:
    • Kristen Welker (07:11): “Why should the public believe that any case brought against the individuals listed there is an independent law enforcement decision and not retribution?”
    • Blanche (07:43): “Well, because you have investigations and you have indictments and you have the result.”
• Stein/Saltatin unpack how this circular logic only further undercuts the prosecution's legitimacy.

---

5. Legal and Cultural Absurdities

• “8647” Significance Debunked
  • Republican Senator Thom Tillis on CNN dismisses the idea that “86” is a code for violence, relating it instead to the restaurant industry term for “removal.”
  • Quote:
    • Thom Tillis (09:52): “If this whole case is based on a picture in the sand of a North Carolina beach, it, again, makes no sense to me... I can’t find any evidence where 86 is used as a call for violence.”
• No Support from Legal Contrarians
  • Hosts note the lack of even token support from conservative legal scholars.

---

6. Bizarre Pivot to Voter ID

• Blanche’s Flubbed Restaurant Analogy
  • Blanche tries to support national voter ID by claiming you have to show ID at a restaurant or club—a comparison the hosts mock mercilessly.
  • Quote:
    • Todd Blanche (11:59): “Like every time you walk into a restaurant or a club, you have to show your ID. How about you have to show your ID to vote?”
  • Sam Stein’s Response (12:13):
    • “Now look, I’ve been to a restaurant... Have they did a new policy? Because last time I went, I did not have to show my ID when I went into the restaurant.”
• The hosts joke about needing ID at a high-class restaurant or strip club, highlighting Blanche’s lack of real-world grounding.

---

Notable Quotes & Timestamps

• Salatin on Blanche’s Defense (03:46):
  • “Sam, how many times did he say rest assured there? Like, that’s a—like that’s an answer.”
• Jeanine Pirro on Transparency (04:29):
  • “We put evidence on the record after the detention hearing so that we could be transparent... That’s what we’re about. We’re about proving the case.”
• Blanche on Prosecution Details (03:10; 04:06):
  • “I am not permitted to get into the details of what the grand jury heard or found, as you know. But rest assured...”
• Welker Confronting Blanche about Politics (07:11):
  • “Why should the public believe that any case brought against the individuals listed there is an independent law enforcement decision and not retribution?”
• Tillis on “86” Meaning (09:52):
  • “I can’t find any evidence where 86 is used as a call for violence.”
• Blanche’s Restaurant ID Analogy (11:59):
  • “Like every time you walk into a restaurant or a club, you have to show your ID.”
• Stein’s Retort (12:13):
  • “Have they did a new policy? Because last time I went, I did not have to show my ID when I went into the restaurant.”

---

Key Timestamps

• 01:01 – Introduction of Todd Blanche’s media role and context of prosecution
• 03:10 – Blanche defends prosecution on Meet the Press
• 04:29 – Contrasting with Jeanine Pirro’s detailed evidence in a separate case
• 05:46 – Question about Etsy/“8647” merchandise and prosecution boundaries
• 07:11 – Welker asks about overt political influence on prosecutions
• 09:52 – Thom Tillis debunks “86” as a codeword for violence
• 11:59 – Blanche’s “restaurant ID” analogy and hosts’ mockery

---

Takeaways

• The episode skewers the political motivations behind the Comey prosecution, illustrating how Blanche’s attempts at justification fall flat.
• Legal, political, and even cultural (restaurant!) rationale for the prosecution is found wanting.
• The hosts’ tone is sharply critical, irreverent, and darkly humorous, capturing the essence of Bulwark commentary.
• Ultimately, the prosecution is framed not only as legally flimsy but also as a clear example of political retribution and bureaucratic sycophancy.

---

Transcript

[SpinQuest Advertiser]

I'm here with spinquest, where you can play and win from the comfort of your own home with hundreds of slot games and all of the table games you love with real cash prizes. Right now, $30 coin packs are on sale for $10. For new users, it's [e-mail] that's s

[SpinQuest Disclaimer Announcer]

p I n q U-E-T.com SpinQuest is a free to play social casino void where prohibited. Visit spinquest.com for more details.

[Sam Stein]

Are you really buying a car online on Autotrader right now?

[Kristen Welker]

Really? I can get super specific with dealer listings and see cars based on my budget.

[Sam Stein]

You can really have it delivered or pick it up. Mommy. I think kid is walking up the slide.

[Jeanine Pirro]

Really?

[Energy Trust of Oregon Announcer]

Autotrader, Buy your car online? Really?

[Sam Stein]

Hey, everybody, it's me, Sam Stein, managing editor at the Bulwark. I'm here with Will Salatin to discuss the Sunday shows. We watched them. We lived them. We laughed, we cried. Will, how you doing, man? You good?

[SpinQuest Disclaimer Announcer]

I'm so. I'm sore, man. I tried to play basketball this morning and my back was out.

[Sam Stein]

I'm still waiting for my invite, but that's a topic for another YouTube main character on the Sunday shows today, I thought was Todd Blanche. The interim attorney general clearly wants to be the permanent attorney general. He's. He's gone forward with a number of very dubious prosecutions that seem to be stagnant that he's picked up and run really hard with. Among them is James Comey. And so Todd Blanche was on Meet the Press this morning, and he was pressed by the host Kristen Welker about this and a bunch of other things before we get into the clips, like, what was your main takeaway about Blanche?

[SpinQuest Disclaimer Announcer]

I just felt. I don't know if I should feel sorry for the guy. You should not. So, you know, until this moment, I wasn't sure how corrupt Todd Blanche was. I mean, he was Trump's personal lawyer. He gets put in this job, but he seems like a relatively honest person by the standards of the Trump administration, which is a low bar. This, this. The prosecution of Comey over the seashells thing and his and Blanche's defense of it shows me that Blanche has no integrity whatsoever. He completely exposed himself.

[Sam Stein]

Well, it's also, it's like, here's a guy who knows that he has one directive if he wants to keep his job, and that's to do this, and he's got to go out and defend it, and that's not to apologize for him. That's actually a criticism of him because he could just resign. It's such. This prosecution, you talk to anyone in the legal profession and they're like, they're not incredulous. They're laughing at how bad this prosecution is. So do you want to just play the. Let's play the game.

[SpinQuest Disclaimer Announcer]

Yeah, let's. Let's start, because it's really good.

[Sam Stein]

All right, let's play the first clip. This is Walker pressing him on the. Now, the seashell prosecution, folks, if you don't know, James Comey, like, 11 months ago, took a picture of seashells on a seashore in North Carolina. It said 86, 47. And he's like, oh, look at this thing I stumbled upon. And there was like a weird uproar because people, you know, in the conservative movement pretended like he was threatening to kill Trump when he wasn't. He took it down, said he didn't realize that people would interpret it that way, which they shouldn't have. And then 11 months later, he's prosecuted for it. So Blanche is asked about this, and this is what he has to say.

[Kristen Welker]

How does that image of seashells amount to a serious threat against the president's life?

[Todd Blanche]

Well, every case requires an investigation, and what you just showed is one part of that investigation. What you just showed is the Instagram Post. Post. Rest assured that the career assistant United States attorneys in North Carolina, the career FBI agents, the career Secret Service agents that investigated this case, didn't just look at the Instagram post and walk away. That's why you saw an indictment last week, notwithstanding the fact that it was last May that the post was made. So I am not permitted to get into the details of what the grand jury heard or found, as you know. But rest assured that it's not just the Instagram post that leads somebody to get indicted.

[SpinQuest Disclaimer Announcer]

Sam, how many times did he say rest assured there? Like, that's a. Like that's an answer.

[Sam Stein]

Yeah, yeah.

[SpinQuest Disclaimer Announcer]

It's just also the word career this, career that. Like, you know, she's like, what do you got for me? And he's like, nothing. Right?

[Sam Stein]

Nothing.

[SpinQuest Disclaimer Announcer]

Not only nothing, he said. What did he say? I am not permitted to get into the details.

[Todd Blanche]

I am not permitted to get into the details of what the grand jury heard or found, as you know. But rest assured that it's not just the Instagram post.

[SpinQuest Disclaimer Announcer]

Let me just do a little bit of contrast here. We have the White House correspondent's Dinner shooter case. Jeanine Pirro, the prosecutor in that case, was on CNN today, and she described in detail what they have on the shooter. She's like, we got video. We got a manifesto.

[Jeanine Pirro]

We got these videos out, Jake. As soon as we could, we went into that detention hearing and we put evidence on the record after the detention hearing so that we could be transparent, so that you could see the videos, you could see the evidence. You could see what we knew we already had. That's what we're about. We're about proving the case.

[SpinQuest Disclaimer Announcer]

Like, lots of evidence, and she can tell us about it. Todd Blanche has bupkis. Bupkis. And then he does this sort of. Oh, it's secret evidence. We can't tell you about it. Sure you can. You could do what Janine Pirro did. You just got nothing.

[Sam Stein]

No. They hold up this idea that because it took so long to do this indictment, therefore it has to be a serious indictment because They've been spending 11 months building the case, which they didn't put into the indictment that they released vis a vis the grand jury. The other thing, though, that I can't get over is like, the case is predicated on this idea that James Comey wanted to kill the president. Okay. Which he didn't. But let's just say he wanted to kill the president and he announced it publicly that he wanted to kill the president. And their response is, yeah, we took 11 months to crack this case. If he's that big a threat, get on it. Right? Like, go faster than that. So the whole thing is so stupid. You see where she talks about all the Etsy posts and the swag where people are selling 8647 gear.

[Kristen Welker]

Should individuals selling or buying 8647 merchandise be concerned that they're going to be prosecuted by the doj?

[Sam Stein]

This is.

[Todd Blanche]

This isn't about a single incident. Okay? This isn't. I mean, of course not.

[SpinQuest Disclaimer Announcer]

Oh, yeah, yeah. Like, people are selling stuff on Amazon with 8647. Are you going to prosecute all those people?

[Sam Stein]

But he was like, no, of course not.

[SpinQuest Disclaimer Announcer]

So on this 11 months thing, because this is really interesting, right? So we spent 11. He's saying in this interview, we took

[Todd Blanche]

11 months over the series of about 11 months. 11 months and 11 months. 11 months.

[SpinQuest Disclaimer Announcer]

So therefore you should assume we have something. No, no, no, man. If you had something, you would tell us about it. Why did it take you 11 months? What intervening event? Sam, could explain why 11 months later they're indicting. Oh, I know. Pam Bondi got fired.

[Sam Stein]

Correct.

[SpinQuest Disclaimer Announcer]

And this guy got put in.

[SpinQuest Advertiser]

Right.

[SpinQuest Disclaimer Announcer]

So the reason that they're doing this is like he's auditioning. He was just put on the spot. And he was told through the firing of the previous ag, if you don't do this, you're out the door.

[Sam Stein]

And look, he didn't even need to be told. I mean, that's the thing, is that. And Welker. And we'll play this clip. Welker, to her credit, was like, Donald Trump has been pretty explicit about demanding these prosecutions, right? Like, he put out that what was supposed to be a DM to Pam Bondi saying, you got to get on this. And so therefore, why should we not take these prosecutions as inherently political prosecutions? He's out there saying he wants them. So let's play the clip back.

[Kristen Welker]

On September 20th, President Trump publicly posted a private message to then Attorney General Pam Bondi, pressuring her to prosecute Senator Adam Schiff. James Comey and Letitia James writing, quote, they're all guilty as hell, but nothing is going to be done. They impeached me twice. They indicted me five times over nothing. Justice must be served. Now, why should the public believe that any case brought against the individuals listed there is an independent law enforcement decision and not retribution?

[Todd Blanche]

Well, because you have investigations and you have indictments and you have the result.

[SpinQuest Disclaimer Announcer]

Wait a minute, wait a minute. Trump told Bondi, do this for me. I'm ordering you to do it. And then she does the indictment, and that result is supposed to convince us that it's honest as opposed to. She just responded to the president. Look, the timeline here, she shows that post from Trump. That was September 20th.

[Sam Stein]

Oh, my God.

[SpinQuest Disclaimer Announcer]

Two days later, Trump puts in Lindsey Halligan to do the. The indictment, and three days later, they get the indictment. So the timeline is super clear that that's the president giving a political order to the AG and putting his person in to make this happen. So the result was not evidence that it was clean. The result was evidence that it was dirty. Right.

[Sam Stein]

And people don't remember Lindsey Halligan was eventually disqualified from the post because of the way she. In which she was appointed, which then invalidated the Comey case, the separate prior Comey case, which is about whether or not he lied to Congress. So then they had to do essentially a workaround, which was find another case and find another district. And that's how we ended up here.

[SpinQuest Disclaimer Announcer]

One little cutesy thing there. Blanche says, well, that case got dismissed. The Lindsey Halligan, the original indictment of Comey and Letitia James, that got convinced that was a technicality. That was only because the prosecutor got invalidated. Not because the evidence was. By the way, Sam, remind me, isn't that what happened to Donald Trump? Like, on the evidence he was never exonerated. It was that Judge Cannon. Cannon chucked the case based on the appointment of the prosecutor. So Todd Blanche is essentially admitting that Trump himself was never exonerated on the evidence.

[Sam Stein]

Right. And also. But if you extend Blanche's argument, like the fact that a, you know, grand jury allowed an indictment to go through, voted for it, if that's proof of guilt, which is essentially what Todd Blanche is getting at, then Donald Trump has had multiple cases of.

[SpinQuest Disclaimer Announcer]

Right, right.

[Sam Stein]

You saw. I didn't watch Thom Tillis, retiring senator from North Carolina, but he was asked about this. What did he say?

[SpinQuest Disclaimer Announcer]

So Tillis was on cnn, and Tillis gets asked about the Comey case. And Tillis says, excuse me, I worked, I, Thom Tillis worked in the restaurant industry. And Tillis says, I've never heard it in the context of violence.

[Thom Tillis]

If this whole case is based on a picture in the sand of a North Carolina beach, it, again, makes no sense to me. Number one, 86. I used to work in the restaurant industry, and I think 86 actually has its roots as a.

[SpinQuest Disclaimer Announcer]

That's my understanding, too.

[Thom Tillis]

It has its roots in 86ing the menu or 86ing the product. I can't find any evidence except some that's come up after the president made the comment about the movies. I know the penal code in North Carolina187, means murder, but I can't find any evidence where 86 is used as a call for violence.

[SpinQuest Disclaimer Announcer]

Now, some people claim they have, but the point is, this is a Republican senator who, if you sat him as a juror in the case of. And you gave him the seashells, he would say, what are you talking about? That is not evidence of an attempt to commit violence.

[Sam Stein]

Yeah. On the shows with Blanche, I think he was. He was read Jonathan Turley's critique of his case. I started thinking about that. I don't think maybe I'm wrong and people could drop it in the comments. And maybe you know of something that I don't know because you read more than I do. Has there been, like, sort of an intellectual defense of this case from the conservative legal ecosystem? Like, so like someone with some gravitas who's been like, actually, you know, there's something there, even if it seems flimsy. I haven't read anything.

[SpinQuest Disclaimer Announcer]

I haven't seen anything for the simple reason that they're not showing us anything. Right. You know, if I were If I were Napolitano or Turley or any of these guys, you got to show me some evidence before I'm going to go on TV or write something and say, you got a case.

[Sam Stein]

Yeah, well, not always. I mean, sometimes they'll go out there and present some flimsy defense and say it's fine. If it seems fine to me. I haven't seen a single piece like that. Even from like a longtime contrarians, it is telling that that's not there. All right, then we're going to end on this because it was so juicy and hilarious. Ty Blanch was talking about other things beyond comey. And the topic of conversation got to Presidential priorities. And they were alluding to the Save America act, which is their big voter ID bill. And he, he had what I think I have to think is a flop. But it made me chuckle. Let's play that.

[Todd Blanche]

There's a lot of things that we can be doing, like voter id. Like every time you walk into a restaurant or a club, you have to show your id. How about you have to show your ID to vote? That's not. That's not anything. That's crazy. And that's what, that's what we should be talking about.

[Sam Stein]

Now look, I've been to a restaurant. In a couple weeks. It's been a couple weeks. Have they did a new policy? Because last time I went, I did not have to show my ID when I went into the restaurant.

[SpinQuest Disclaimer Announcer]

Sam, are we going to the wrong restaurant? We'd be going to a higher class of restaurant where they there, Sir, I'm sorry. Are you really Samuel Stein? Can you show me your identification?

[Sam Stein]

I gotta find the id. The restaurant that demands ID at the door. That's not a strip club. That's not a strip club.

[SpinQuest Disclaimer Announcer]

It's got to be, I think, you know, they're interested in your credit card for sure. I don't know if they're really interested in your driver's license.

[SpinQuest Advertiser]

Oh, my God.

[Sam Stein]

That must have been a flop. I can't. I can't imagine he really believes that you have to show ID at a restaurant. I will. I gotta bounce, man. Sundays I got a lot of going on. But thank you for doing this. I appreciate it. For those who watch, thank you for watching. Reminder, reminder. We got these live shows coming up in California, San Diego, May 20, L.A. may 21. We are busting between them. It's going to be me, Tim, Sarah Longwell. Get your [e-mail] events. You're not going to want to miss it's. Going to be great. Till then. Talk to you soon.

[SpinQuest Advertiser]

You know what? It sucks to be bored. But when I get on my phone and play real casino games on spinquest.com the time flies by. That two hour wait at the DMV seems like 10 minutes. Play your favorite slots, live blackjack, live preps with a live dealer, new players $30 coin packs are on sale for 10 bucks. Play spinquest.com and you'll never be bored again.

[SpinQuest Disclaimer Announcer]

Spinquest is a free to play social casino void where prohibited. Visit spinquest.com for more details at Energy

[Energy Trust of Oregon Announcer]

Trust of Oregon we know it isn't easy the tremendous costs of maintaining a home, living in a house with drafty windows, poorly insulated spaces or equipment that's running well past its prime. But we also know how to help you upgrade your systems, insulate your spaces and replace what is old with new energy efficient solutions. Find cash [e-mail] Energy Trust of Oregon More power to you.