The controversy over “8647” as code for calling for President Donald Trump’s assassination now extends from a DOJ investigation of America’s former FBI Director James Comey all the way to accusations hurled at a Kirkwood school official by a U.S. senator.
Accusations against Kirkwood School Board Education President Judy Moticka prompted her to issue a statement clarifying her private Facebook post, which went public and was picked up by media outlets.
“I wrote a post using my personal, private Facebook profile lamenting the fact that it was Stephen Colbert’s last week of shows. Three days later, I became aware that a screen shot of that post had been shared on an unrelated feed,” said Moticka.
“I was contacted by people I have never met and informed that my message was being interpreted as threatening. I immediately added an update to my original post clarifying my intent and rejecting violence in any form,” she said.
On May 18, Moticka posted to her private Facebook account her disappointment over the end of CBS television’s “The Late Show with Stephen Colbert.” Moticka ended her missive with “all I can add is 8647.”
The term “86” is a familiar term in the restaurant industry meaning “throw out” or “remove.” But some believe it means a call to take violent action based on pop culture references. The number “47” refers to Donald Trump, the 47th president of the United States.
Several days after Moticka’s post, she learned it was shared on the conservative X account called “Libs of Tik Tok.” Right-wing media took aim at her post. Two weeks later, U.S. Sen. Eric Schmitt, R-Missouri, took aim at Moticka.
In a post on X, Schmitt shared a screenshot of the Facebook post from Kirkwood schools’ Moticka. The Missouri Republican lamented a dearth of coverage of the “assassination call” from the suburbs of St. Louis.
“Nothing to see here just the President of the Kirkwood, MO school board Judy Moticka calling for the murder of the President of the United States,” declared Schmiit.
“No news coverage about it. Just the casual acceptance of the Luigi Left’s assassination culture,” said Schmitt, in a reference to Luigi Nicholas Mangione.
Mangione is the alleged shooter in the assassination of Brian Thompson, CEO of UnitedHealthcare on Dec. 4, 2024, in New York City. Right-wing media have labeled Mangione the hero of a supposed “loony left assassination culture” perpetuating violence on America.
“The controversy over the Kirkwood School official’s Facebook post is a classic example of ‘willing suspension of disbelief,’ a term that the media literacy movement has borrowed from Coleridge,” said Arthur Silverblatt, past head of the Media Department at Webster University.
The phrase “willing suspension of disbelief,” coined by the English poet Samuel Taylor Coleridge, described his concept of how audiences willingly set aside their logical judgment and accept implausible or “fantastical elements” in literature.
“There is certainly something ‘fantastical’ in Sen. Schmitt charging that a school board official wants a president murdered,” said Silverblatt, but Schmitt has an audience of Trump loyalists who want to believe this.
“They want to believe that liberal school officials could sanction murder, that public schools are riddled with loony left personnel, that 8647 can somehow be a call to assassinate the president,” he said.
Silverblatt is a long-time media literacy educator and author of 15 books on the topic of literacy, including “Media Literacy: Keys to Interpreting Media Messages.” Silverblatt said Schmitt is smart enough to know better, but he makes wild charges against Moticka to gain media attention.
“Schmitt knows the MAGA base loves this sort of stuff. They want to believe it,” said Silverblatt. “He knows it pleases Trump, pleases Trump’s base, and it will put him in the media spotlight on places like FOX News.
“It brings to mind another media phenomenon: ‘Where’s Waldo?’ Well, where’s Sen. Schmitt?” said Silverblatt. “Well, here he is getting the media he desires popping off about public school officials, assassination plots, 8647.”
Silverblatt said media literacy calls for a little investigation to find that the “86” number originates in the restaurant business. It can mean the customers have left a table and, “86,” that the dishes can be removed and the table cleaned up.
Silverblatt also said thoughtful consumers of media might also compare Schmitt’s treatment of Moticka versus his treatment of Jan. 6 insurrectionists.
“The senator is pretty quiet about the Jan. 6 rioters,” said Silverblatt. “They actually called for killing Vice President Mike Pence,” said Silverblatt. “What they did was beyond free speech. Building a scaffold for hanging Pence. Beating up cops. Violently breaking into the U.S. Capitol.
“Schmitt also says nothing about Trump pardoning the violent rioters who wanted to kill Mike Pence,” said Silverblatt. “Nor has Schmitt said much about Trump wanting to give these people millions of dollars in tax money.”
“8647” has become a major free speech controversy and First Amendment issue. The controversy centers on whether the phrase is constitutionally protected political speech or a “true threat” of violence.
Former FBI Director James Comey has been indicted by a federal grand jury for posting an Instagram photo of seashells arranged to spell “8647.” Prosecutors alleged it crossed the line into a threat. Comey’s defenders maintain the post is protected political expression.
In a related dispute tagged as the “National Mall Flag Controversy,” a federal judge issued a restraining order preventing the National Park Service (NPS) from removing a protest flag displaying “8647” near the White House.
U.S. District Judge Randolph Moss noted that it was “difficult to fathom” how a reasonable observer, viewing the flag at an anti-administration protest, would interpret it as a credible threat.
The U.S. Supreme Court in past precedents has ruled that in order to restrict speech under the Constitution, the government must prove the speech in question constitutes an “incitement to imminent lawless action“ or a “true threat.”
“I’m not sure I trust the Supreme Court that we have now to uphold their past precedents,” said Silverblatt. “They have trampled on other precedents set by the court on civil rights and women’s issues, but hopefully they will uphold the First Amendment.”
Don Corrigan is former editor of the Webster-Kirkwood Times and emeritus professor at Webster College
