FBI Director Jim Comey notified Congress to update his previous testimony that the agency had completed its investigation of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s personal e-mail server:
In connection with an unrelated case, the FBI has learned of the existence of e-mails that appear to be pertinent to the investigation. I am writing to inform you that the investigative team briefed me on this yesterday, and I agreed that the FBI should take appropriate investigative steps designed to allow investigators to review these e-mails to determine whether they contain classified information, as well as to assess their importance to our investigation.
Although the FBI cannot yet assess whether or not this material may be significant, and I cannot predict how long it will take us to complete this additional work, I believe it is important to update your Committees about our efforts in light of my previous testimony.
Comey’s previous recommendation against charging Hillary Clinton for her negligent mishandling of classified information was derided by those outside of Hillary Clinton’s orbit as political and dangerous. The investigation reeked of corruption and nothing Comey said about the investigation made any sense. Calls to “lock her up” or otherwise hold her accountable for her sloppy handling of our nation’s secrets have been heard at both Republican and Democratic functions.
When the news broke that Clinton’s troubles were not over, her friends and defenders in the campaign and in the media did not take the news very well. Here are four of the worst ways they responded to the news.
1) The Election is Rigged.
It was barely a week ago that the media told us that “rigged election” accusations threatened the foundations of democracy. And until today, Comey was presented as a highly respected public servant who performed an honest and flawless investigation.
While Clinton foes still seemed suspicious about Comey, worrying that he was reopening the investigation just to hand out even more immunity deals in exchange for no helpful information or to give a much-needed fig-leaf of due diligence, Clinton fans were outraged.
New York Times columnist Paul Krugman took to Twitter to repeatedly claim that American government functions may be rigged to favor an electoral outcome.
If we don't hear more from Comey, we just have to conclude that he was trying to swing election. And *that* should be the story.
— Paul Krugman (@paulkrugman) October 28, 2016
Comey probably not trying to elect Trump. But is he trying to help R senators? If he just leaves this hanging, that will be best guess
— Paul Krugman (@paulkrugman) October 28, 2016
John Podesta also questioned the “timing” of the news.
It was basically an all hands on deck collective freakout, from Democratic crisis communications firms to third-rate journalists at partisan publications:
.@matthewamiller tweetstorm on Comey's conduct and how it breaks with pre-election DOJ precedent (via @AdamAmbrogi) pic.twitter.com/ThF2GvrT3q
— Brendan Nyhan (@BrendanNyhan) October 28, 2016
https://twitter.com/imillhiser/status/792057572333350914
So much for REPUBLICAN FBI Director Comey not wanting to influence an election. How about those missing 22 million emails from Bush Admin?
— Joseph Kapsch (@JosephKapsch) October 28, 2016
Comey refused to even tell Congress if FBI was investigating Trump camp for Russia hack, but regular updates on Clinton are apparently A-ok.
— Matthew Miller (@matthewamiller) October 28, 2016
Comey thrusts himself into election, going to bat for GOP. Letter says nothing, so Trump can claim — anything! Reckless & irressponsible
— Michelangelo Signorile (@MSignorile) October 28, 2016
Why would FBI Director Comey find it pertinent to release a speculative letter a week before a presidential election? Totally inappropriate.
— Matt McDermott (@mattmfm) October 28, 2016
At one point, the Democratic Coalition Against Trump filed a complaint with the Department of Justice’s Office of Professional Responsibility alleging that Comey was violating a law forbidding federal employees from participating in political activities:
It is absolutely absurd that FBI Director Comey would support Donald Trump like this with only 11 days to go before the election,” said Scott Dworkin, Senior Advisor to the Democratic Coalition Against Trump. “It is an obvious attack from a lifelong Republican who used to serve in the Bush White House, just to undermine her campaign. Comey needs to focus on stopping terrorists and protecting America, not investigating our soon to be President-Elect Hillary Clinton.
2) Investigations Aren’t Investigations
As soon as Comey’s letter was received, Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) announced it. Because Comey said, “the FBI should take appropriate investigative steps designed to allow investigators to review these emails” after previously closing the investigation, Chaffetz said he was reopening the investigation.
Hillary fans took to Twitter for some much needed redefining of terms to explain that investigators investigating is not an investigation.
The. Investigation. Was. Never. Closed. And. It. Is. Not. Being. Re-opened. https://t.co/41PtK7Ycz4
— Joe Adalian (@TVMoJoe) October 28, 2016
Hacked e-mails long ago revealed that Marc Ambinder publishes the exact words that the Clintons tell him to. Here’s what he said today:
Republicans who say that @HillaryClinton is now "under FBI investigation" or that the FBI "re-opened" one … are lying. They are liars.
— Marc Ambinder (@marcambinder) October 28, 2016
Various media types took to Twitter to claim that in point of fact, it wasn’t a reopening of an investigation because the investigation had never been closed. Media reporters wrote about how headlines needed to not claim a reopening of an investigation because the investigation hadn’t ever been closed. Which is news for many people, given how much this was claimed across the nation by politicians and media outlets. For just a few examples:
In that story, NPR wrote, “Lynch announced the decision in a statement Wednesday, saying Comey and ‘career prosecutors and agents’ unanimously recommended that the investigation be closed without charges.”
Heck, The New York Times‘ first version of the story on the FBI reopening the investigation into Clinton’s e-mails began:
The freakout over the technicality was little more than a distraction from the real news of Comey’s letter.
3) Weiner’s So Wacky!
Some wondered if Comey’s letter had to do with the Washington Examiner’s report about classified information from the Hillary Clinton server appearing on a Bulgarian server.
The New York Times reported that e-mails relevant to the Clinton investigation had been found as part of a separate investigation into former Rep. Anthony Weiner’s texting with underage victims, including sexual pictures of himself while laying next to his young son. Weiner is married to Huma Abedin, Clinton’s aide-de-camp.
Some tried to distract from Clinton’s bad news:
The Weiner thing is actually helpful for HRC, turning this all into farce and a punchline
— Jennifer Rubin (@JRubinBlogger) October 28, 2016
Alternate headline: The alleged sexual misconduct of three men is dominating the final weeks of the presidential campaign.
— Nick Confessore (@nickconfessore) October 28, 2016
Today was the stupidest news cycle in like, what, a week?
— Jamelle Bouie (@jbouie) October 28, 2016
4) This Is No Biggie
Comey sent his letter to Congress because he had to. He had testified to Congress that the investigation was over but new information came to light requiring further investigation. He didn’t share more details, because that would be premature, and he didn’t hide the news, because that would be unethical.
If the anonymous sources the Times or others are relying on are telling the truth, the information came to light because of Weiner’s improprieties. The seriousness of that information is unknown. It could be huge. It could be nothing. But apart from the few people involved in the investigation, nobody knows.
Democratic allies got to work downplaying the news:
Nothingburger.
— David Plouffe (@davidplouffe) October 28, 2016
I can't imagine the Democratic partisan who says "I was going to support Clinton but then the FBI dropped a vague letter so now #MAGA." https://t.co/3wLoNxSY5g
— Jamelle Bouie (@jbouie) October 28, 2016
Imagine if the media had been as non-plussed about revelations regarding Donald Trump. And consider how the media have treated with disdain Republicans who have overlooked Trump’s vulgarity in order to vote for him. Do they treat with disdain Democrats who overlook Hillary Clinton’s history of corruption and lying?
