The Washington Post has changed its headline from “reopens investigation” to “takes new investigative steps.”
Evidently the investigation was never technically closed.
Come on, Comey. Come out and say what the hell is going on!
“Reopen” has bigger implications, that the case was closed, but the evidence so powerful that it negates such a determination. And what, pray, was this “unrelated case”?
I think Comey is still a “team player”, with an eye to the possible benefits from a Republican administration. I think he’s throwing as much shade as he can without actually committing himself to anything like “illegal” or “indictable”.
As I noted in the other thread, we already have the previous investigation to look at.
As Comey said when he declared that no indictment was recommended: (with a lot of bones tossed to the Republicans) "to make those decisions [to indict] responsibly they must consider “the context of a person’s actions, and how similar situations have been handled in the past.”
I do not see any references in the recent letter to a change on how the actions made before are different now in this “reopening” or that there is a difference on what was done before by Clinton and aids. Once again: So far the FBI is talking about what other emails may be marked as clasified, and that they can not report on how useful they are right now.
Well, they are useful for politicians that want to make a lot of hay.
The phrase “emails that appear to be pertinent” seems pretty vague. You’d think that pertinence or non-pertinence would be obvious. It may be that any connection is tenuous.
Comey has been under a lot of pressure from Republicans. This could be his way of reducing that pressure - find something, anything, so that he can say he’s investigating, at least till after the election.
There is no way in hell there won’t be further official comment.
So if she were sacrificing babies on a marble altar, that’d still be ok? How about an altar of still beating hearts? Or an altar of babies?
(:), just in case.)
Do you mean before Nov. 8? I’d take the under on that one for sure. Not saying clarification is unlikely, but it wouldn’t shock me if this is the last word from the FBI before we vote.
I do mean before Nov 8th. He will be under unprecedented pressure from every conceivable direction to clarify.
Meh.
Of course this will be reported on hysterically by both sides but it does seem that Comey is appropriate.
There are now emails that may or may not be pertinent but certainly any potentially pertinent information deserves to be evaluated. If they are determined to be pertinent then perhaps the case could be re-opened. Ignoring potentially meaningful information would be inappropriate. Looking at it without informing Congress would be inappropriate. Delaying telling Congress would be inappropriate.
Declaring this as “re-opening” is inaccurate but gets the attention.
The MSM in general seems to be backing away from the “reopens” angle.
Curiouser and curiouser.
Every Clinton scandal eventually comes back to a Weiner.
(I’m sorry. I had to.)
While admitting guilt is certainly called for, begging for mercy would be more appropriate.
Would Comey be under any legal obligation to keep the committee informed of any re-opening of an investigation(or whatever you wish to call it) in a timely manner?
That’s what’s being alleged by some former DOJ people on Twitter. I haven’t seen any solid reporting on it yet.
He knew what he was doing. Mercy is for the weak.
Twitter (that unimpeachable source) says that it’s 3 emails, not from HRC, from Weiner’s phone. Which sounds like nothing, if true.