FBI Reviewing Clinton emails news: LATEST - Emails from Weiner investigation

[IceSpear]

BS from a partisan hack FBI director and the modern day McCarthy Jason Chaffetz, but the media will/has run with it since they want a horserace and one final "Trump comeback!" narrative.

Luckily, the media despises Trump even more than they despise Hillary, so they'll likely find something to endlessly hammer him with at the last minute, giving her the "momentum" heading into election day. In contrast, media darlings Rubio or Kasich would've been inevitable at this point. So congrats on that Republicans!

[IceSpear]

This is a colossal nothingburger.

It's still going to hurt her in the polls though simply because it's a very negative news cycle. Americans have the attention span of a goldfish, and tend to care more about the "tone" of a news story as opposed to the substance. But that actually works in the Dems' favor this time, since the media and public will surely find a new (most likely anti-Trump) chewtoy in the next 11 days.

[IceSpear]

I guess I don't know why this would influence anyone's vote/motivation to vote.

"I heard a bad thing about Hillary's emails on the news, maybe Trump is the lesser evil!"

"Wow, Trump said something mean about _______. Maybe Hillary is the lesser evil!"

Ladies and gentleman, the undecided voter. Anyone who thinks the substance matters is kidding themselves.

[IceSpear]

I hope she grills the media for jumping to conclusions.

Don't hold your breath. Hillary's failure to confront the media on their sexism and consistent bias against her for decades has been the biggest mistake of her campaign, nothing else even comes close. By refusing to take on the problem directly she gives their claims legitimacy and allows "scandals" like this to endlessly fester. I've been saying this since 2014 (yes, before she even ran!) Something tells me the problem won't be suddenly rectified with 11 days after 20 months (actually, decades) of being a willing pinata.

[IceSpear]

So this is nothing. Comey needs to hold a press conference asap.

Wouldn't that just make things worse? Either he:

1) Continues his partisan hatchet job with it
2) Is as vague as possible, just like with the letter (most likely possibility)
3) Admits he essentially has nothing against Hillary

1 would obviously be disastrous. 2 would just feed a media feeding frenzy of speculation and exacerbate the problem. Even 3 wouldn't do that much good, since substance doesn't matter. Optics and tone are the only thing that matter, and they're both terrible regardless. The correct strategy here was to either a) wait it out and just hope the story is replaced with something else sooner rather than later or b) start a full out war against GOP hack Comey and the ADHD media that cares more about ratings than journalistic integrity.

[IceSpear]

"Clinton Wants Answers" is CNN's new headline.

I sense a shift in momentum.

Bad or good?

The fact that this is a story at all is bad. The extent of the damage will depend on where the narrative goes from here and also how quickly the media finds a new chewtoy.

[IceSpear]

The strategy now has to be to indirectly get her supporters more fired up than ever against a partisan FBI. Play up the fact that she is always tarnished with baseless crap and always stays resilient.

Hey, we agree for once. Either that or do nothing and let the goldfish-esque attention spans of the media/public do its job. I find the "Give Comey legitimacy and respectfully ask him for more information to extend this story's lifespan" strategy questionable at best.

[IceSpear]

You know sh*t has hit the fan when IceSpear, of all people, is getting gloomy.

I'm not sure why you say that. I was never one of the people who thought she was inevitable in the general or going to win in a massive historic landslide. In fact, I criticized the latter just as much as I criticized the doomsayers. Funnily enough, the doomsayers/massive landslide talk was sometimes the same exact people, continually getting whiplash depending upon what the polls of the day said.

I wouldn't really say I'm gloomy, btw. No doubt this story hurts, but I'm actually more troubled by the Democratic reaction to it than the story itself. "GIVE US MORE ABUSE COMEY (R)! DO IT NOW!!!!" I stand by my statement about the media and Hillary's refusal to take them on, but I've been saying that since 2014, it's just particularly relevant now. I do think she will still win, just based off all the evidence/data and the fact that I'm skeptical the media is going to go another 10 days without at least one avalanche of negative Trump coverage, which will make this seem like a distant memory to the ADHD public. But we'll see.

You know sh*t has hit the fan when IceSpear, of all people, is getting gloomy.

IceSpear has been part of the chicken little crowd during the entire general election.

Are you confusing me with somebody else? I've been predicting a 348-190 Clinton win since March, and have not wavered. The last time I chicken littled was February when I thought the media would install their precious Hispanic Obama as president.

Unless you consider saying "Hillary isn't going to win Texas" or "Hillary isn't going to win by double digits" chicken littling, in which case...LMAO.

[IceSpear]

No, he isn't confusing anyone for anything. Ebsy is just a miserable person, you see.

Regardless, I'm still curious where he got the impression. I know there's another D-PA poster who has predicted the apocolypse about 50 times.

[IceSpear]

This is the POINT. No one has even read the f***ing emails yet.

This really is a total beat-up. It will hurt a little around the edges, but as to radically changing the race, no.

Yeah, but nobody cares. Very early on (as in like, April or May 2015) the "scandal" became not about anything substantive, but about "look! another negative Hillary e-mail story!" as just a vague generality. The average voter probably couldn't explain 90% of the details about Hillary's emails to you, yet the stories hurt her regardless. Substance is totally irrelevant. That's just the way the media and the public is. It's very sad. Is it any better in Australia?

As for how it effects the race, I have no clue right now. Anything from a slight Trump bounce to a dead heat race or small Trump lead wouldn't surprise me at this point. But the same factor that was a blessing for Trump and allowed him to survive the McCain comments, the disabled reporter comments, the Khan stuff, the pussygrabber tape, and all the other disqualifying things he's said/done is now a curse: said media/American public's short attention span. For all we know this could be a distant memory in a week. In fact, I think it likely will be.

[IceSpear]

If this is true Comey must resign

https://twitter.com/JuddLegum/status/792165417108148224

Hopefully. Comey resigning in disgrace is the one way this could become a net positive for Hillary.

[IceSpear]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-fbi-clinton-email-probe-20161028-story.html

What a joke.

One last gift to his fellow Republicans before he is replaced by President-elect Clinton?

Yep. And any Democrat who thought Comey was some kind of non partisan hero is sure looking dumb right now. And yes, before anyone comments, that includes our "wonderful" VP nominee that managed to lose a debate to Mike Pence of all people.

[IceSpear]

I don't at all buy the idea that each party automatically gets 44% or 45% of the electorate no matter what. I'm sure there is a hard base, but it's not that high.

Why not? Even Goldwater and Mondale got ~40%, and the country was much less polarized then. If there was ever a year where Republicans were going to fall to their floor it was 2008, which was a complete perfect storm for the Democrats (exciting young and inspirational candidate, incumbent Republican with a 25% approval, economic collapse just before the election blamed on the Republicans, a Republican VP candidate who was a punchline, the media in the tank for Obama, etc.) Despite all these headwinds, McCain still got 46%.

[IceSpear]

Honestly how on Earth is this even a scandal? This is basically what I understand:

-FBI investigates Weiner.
-FBI finds more emails between Hillary and Huma on it.
-The emails had nothing to do with her private email server.

So basically the scandal is...Hillary sent some emails to someone who worked for her who happened to be married to a perverted guy?

Because emails attract ratings, which really goes along with what I've said about idiots and the media.

Then how did Obama get elected with all those silly non-scandals about him? Did everyone just turn into idiots now?

They weren't legitimized outside of right-wing news--CNN and other similar 'reputable' outlets have legitimized the Clinton 'scandals' by giving them equal or more coverage to Trump.

Yeah, I don't know what BRTD is talking about. The fake Obama scandals were mostly ignored by the media. "Fast and Furious" for example, was mostly confined to the right wing blogosphere. If it was Hillary's "scandal" though, it would've gotten front page coverage on all media outlets for months.

[IceSpear]

Honestly how on Earth is this even a scandal? This is basically what I understand:

-FBI investigates Weiner.
-FBI finds more emails between Hillary and Huma on it.
-The emails had nothing to do with her private email server.

So basically the scandal is...Hillary sent some emails to someone who worked for her who happened to be married to a perverted guy?

Because emails attract ratings, which really goes along with what I've said about idiots and the media.

Then how did Obama get elected with all those silly non-scandals about him? Did everyone just turn into idiots now?

They weren't legitimized outside of right-wing news--CNN and other similar 'reputable' outlets have legitimized the Clinton 'scandals' by giving them equal or more coverage to Trump.

Yeah, I don't know what BRTD is talking about. The fake Obama scandals were mostly ignored by the media. "Fast and Furious" for example, was mostly confined to the right wing blogosphere. If it was Hillary's "scandal" though, it would've gotten front page coverage on all media outlets for months.

Oh yes, the media completely ignored Jeremiah Wright.

There's a reason that's the only counter example you've posted...

Btw, even Jeremiah Wright got dropped after a month or two. Whereas the email sh*t has gone on for nearly 2 years.

[IceSpear]

Let's be honest, the mere fact focus in on the email thing again is bad for Hillary's campaign. I'm convinced unless something else major happens it won't change the ultimate outcome, but it will hurt. The question for how long.

I don't think "something else" will happen in this story, but I'm counting on "something else" happening that will distract from this. A Trump bombshell, or even something the media invents out of thin air and/or blows out of proportion to pummel him with like they've done countless times with Hillary (ex: She has pneumonia! SHE'S DOOOOOMMMEEDDDD!")

If on the off chance this is the last major event of the election, then yeah, things suddenly get very dicey.

[IceSpear]

I don't think "something else" will happen in this story, but I'm counting on "something else" happening that will distract from this. A Trump bombshell, or even something the media invents out of thin air and/or blows out of proportion to pummel him with like they've done countless times with Hillary (ex: She has pneumonia! SHE'S DOOOOOMMMEEDDDD!")

If on the off chance this is the last major event of the election, then yeah, things suddenly get very dicey.

Isn't it crazy how Trump's first group of assault accusers gets big press, like the Clinton email stuff, then it dies off after a 5~ days or so, yet Clinton's email "scandal" literally ERUPTS every single time any little break in the case happens? This latest Comey stuff is pretty weak all things considered yet it hit the news like a tsunami.

But, of course, a continuing trickle of Trump sexual assault accusers literally gets almost no coverage. Media has now confirmed that emails that are probably completely benign are significantly more important than dozens of women coming forward accusing Trump, a presidential candidate, of sexual assault.

Pretty amazing to me. Given that Trump confirmed his behavior on tape, I think that whole story is worth more than 5~ days of coverage.

The email story would've lasted a month for any other politician, tops. Meanwhile, this has gone on for nearly 2 years. Remember "dead broke"? They turned what would've been a 2-3 day long story for any other politician into a 3 month saga. Actually, dead broke was when I saw the writing on the wall in regards to the media's treatment of Hillary, and knew it would even exceed the 2008 negativity toward her. I've been saying since 2014 she needed to forcefully take on the media's consistent bias and sexism against her and that they were her biggest obstacle to the presidency. Unfortunately it never happened, but I've been proven right. Rather than discrediting the media and their smear campaigns, the Clinton campaign from day 1 has been more focused with rebutting the "substance" of the day to day email BS, not realizing that it was an endless game that you can't possibly hope to win. For every lie you debunk with facts, 10 more "email questions" come out like a hydra. As long as you continue to give them credibility and assume they're operating in good faith, they'll never stop using her as a pinata.  The only way to stop it is to discredit the source. Unfortunately, it is far too late to go that route. Also unfortunately, this problem will follow her to the Oval Office if she wins.

And yeah, the fact that they care more about emails than sexual assault is disgusting, but at this point it does not surprise me in the least. I've become desensitized to the deplorable media we have.

[IceSpear]

Comey just did his job. Big news for conspiracy theory lovers

comey knew himself that what he did could influence the outcome of the election....gets quite clear in the second letter.

Then why did he not recommend her indictment? Even if Lynch didn't act on it, he still could have referred her for prosecution. He didn't. If he wanted Trump to win, why didn't he publicly and explicitly call for Lynch to indict her?

Because a) There was no justification for doing so, so character assassination was the next best option b) Dems would just replace her, making it pointless in terms of helping the GOP.

[IceSpear]

in other news

ABC, CBS, NBC have devoted more mins to Clinton emails this year than **all policy issues combined.**
http://tyndallreport.com/comment/20/5778/
http://mediamatters.org/blog/2016/10/26/study-confirms-network-evening-newscasts-have-abandoned-policy-coverage-2016-campaign/214120

Should not surprise anyone who's been paying even scant attention this entire campaign.

"but muh liberal media!"

[IceSpear]

Harry Reid informs Comey that he may have violated the Hatch Act via letter today:

https://twitter.com/sahilkapur/status/792843842479239168

#LockHimUp

[IceSpear]

Wait what? There's "explosive evidence" of ties between Trump's advisors and the Russian government?

I wonder why Comey hasn't publicized that at all.

Do you really wonder?

[IceSpear]

Harry Reid: FBI Director’s ‘Partisan Actions’ May Violate Federal Law

Link: http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2016/10/30/harry-reid-comeys-partisan-actions-may-violate-federal-law/

And I'm sure Harry Reid has no "partisan" intentions in saying this.  Lol.  Not really a reliable source atm.

No more partisan intentions than Comey (R) does.

[IceSpear]

Harry Reid: FBI Director’s ‘Partisan Actions’ May Violate Federal Law

Link: http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2016/10/30/harry-reid-comeys-partisan-actions-may-violate-federal-law/

And I'm sure Harry Reid has no "partisan" intentions in saying this.  Lol.  Not really a reliable source atm.

No more partisan intentions than Comey (R) does.

Maybe.  Except that Comey has demonstrated in the past year that he can act independently of his partisan affiliation in his role.

By saying I want to indict Hillary Clinton but have no evidence to do so?

Presumably by slandering and besmirching the reputation of an individual he had no intention of prosecuting, which goes against all FBI precedent and decorum.

[IceSpear]

henster and OC both back in the same day? I think this is foreshadowing a jfern reappearance.

[IceSpear]

I highly doubt Comey would do what he did unless they found something that may alter the course of the investigation. It just doesn't make sense otherwise, unless it was a maneuver to cover himself in case he's hailed back in front of congress for saying they had closed the investigation when in fact they have not.

I don't think he would do this just to influence the election. There are obviously a lot of rumors out there, but if any of them are true, it's horrible news for HRC.

Like those rumors about how she was going to get indicted?