Say, is this a scandal yet?
Too bad he didn’t think to classify it.
This is headline breaking news all over the place right now.
Comey seems to have been fair and non-partisan in his handling of the emails matter to date, but he’s not going to risk his career for Hillary. If damaging information has to come out just days before the election, or if the matter has to remain unresolved until after – which is almost equally damaging to her – then that’s how it will go.
Unless this gets resolved into a non-issue very very quickly, this has the potential to be really bad for Hillary.
Awesome. 
Maybe they’ll finally hold Hillary accountable.
She broke the law and everybody knows it. There should be some justice in this. Not jail. But something. Maybe a substantial fine or Congressional sanction?
Not sure how you cannot understand this.
FBI investigated Clinton. They found that Clinton did technically break the law but that ‘no reasonable prosecutor’ would prosecute the case*.
The FBI, in an unrelated case, found more information about the initial Clinton email investigation. So they are going to ‘take appropriate investigative steps designed to allow investigators to review these emails to determine whether they contain classified information, as well as to assess their importance to** our investigation**.’ The bolded ‘our investigation’ is, of course, referring to the investigation into Clinton and her handling of classified information.
Clearly, Clinton is the target since the emails they found relate to the investigation where ta da Clinton was the target.
Side note, this is just funny.
Slee
*My view on politicians who break the rules is simple. They ought to be stomped on every single time, regardless of party, etc. I believe that Comey screwed up on this.
It’s definitely big news, and it doesn’t help, but without further information how is it more than rumor and innuendo? If Comey says nothing, this is just “that email thing still exists”. It might motivate some Hillary-haters, but it’s no new information, unless Comey elaborates and explains what he’s actually doing.
That’s right. It will motivate some GOP folks, maybe tip the undecideds a little. It’s probably worth a coupe of points. It’s not worth six points. But a couple of points might matter for downballot.
I suspect the same people who said Clinton’s 9/11 video were the end of her campaign will say the same about this. They were wrong then, and they’re wrong now.
It’s significant, but not election-changing.
I love to see how the usual suspects on this forum scramble to explain this away.
Cutting and pasting a series of tweets from NBC journalist Pete Williams (via Mark Murray):
Reporting from @PeteWilliamsNBC: This is not a “reopening” of the email investigation. As a technical matter, it was never closed
More @PeteWilliamsNBC: Comey letter was sent to Hill “out of an abundance of caution” to be extra thorough 2/
.@PeteWilliamsNBC adds: There is no sense that any of this was due to withholding of evidence. New emails discovered on “another device” 3/
And @PeteWilliamsNBC says that while the political consequences of today’s news could be substantial, they might not be legally 4/
Nope, what Comey said was that Clinton, but more specifically her aids “may have violated the law in using a private email server when she was Secretary of State, but that their actions didn’t warrant criminal charges.”
And based on the previous investigation, seems that more of the same. With the same result.
Of course it is, I foresee just the basis of more goose chase investigations from the Republicans during the coming Clinton administration.
As pointed and based on the previous investigation, seems that this is more of the same. With the same results.
Unless the context has changed regarding the new emails, the result is bound to be the same.
It’s Hillary’s election to lose. She is good at losing.
It’s Hillary’s hubris that gets her into trouble. Rules? What rules? That’s her attitude.
She knew that all State Dept employees were required to use the official email accounts.
She just says, screw that. I’m using my own server.
Most Americans feel that rules apply to everybody. Giving Hillary a pass is just wrong.
Explain what away? They’re reviewing some more emails. Big deal. Unless or until they find something wrong, (which would be after the election in any case) there is nothing that needs to be explained.
Absurd to say there’s any question Clinton is the target, deliberate misreading of plain English. The first paragraph of the letter makes clear ‘the investigation’ was the one of Clinton’s emails. Now emails from an ‘unrelated case’ might be relevant to ‘the investigation’, of Clinton obviously.
Silly semantic arguments reduce one’s credibility to make substantive arguments. I always recommend against them.
Clearly Comey is saying he has additional evidence potentially relevant to the original investigation, of Hillary Clinton (among others), and feels the potential high enough to inform Congressional committees he previously essentially (again without super Clintonian parsing) told that the investigation was over. Now he’s saying it’s not necessarily. If he’s ‘an honorable public servant’ and really believes that, he’d be putting his fingers on the scale of the election not to tell Congress until after the election.
And it’s a given that non-classified politically relevant information given to Congress is going to be leaked. The Democrats would absolutely do that too and anyone who argues otherwise can’t be serious, giving them credit for any sentience at all. 
Of course this could be a minor addendum, and that may be reported in the next 11 days from ‘sources’. It doesn’t seem as likely there would be official word that soon though.
Yeah, Rick Lazio, he knows…
The 9/11 tape did drop her significantly in the polls. According to 538, Clinton had an estimated 3.7% margin on September 11. Eleven days later it was 2.3 %.
It bounced back up - later, and after Debate 1. There is no “later” than eleven days, and no debates remaining. The timing of this is very bad indeed.
Of course, it may be that technically this isn’t a reopening. Doesn’t matter. The public thinks it’s a reopening, because that’s what the headlines say, and most people stop thinking after they’ve read the headline.
Not worth having this debate here, but that reading of the polls is hard to support since there wasn’t actually a marked change in the trendline. If anything, September 11 marked the beginning of the Clinton resurgence before the first debate, but it certainly didn’t start that downward trend that began in August. You can see that more clearly if you look at other aggregators like HuffPo and RCP, since they don’t weight the old polls as heavily as 538.
That’s why I think it will be significant. It’s just that significant is not 6-points of change.
Hold on - how does the *sender *have control over whether the recipient uses a public/private server to receive?
Nope, I think this time it does because we already have the previous result to look at. "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 to a change on how the actions made before are different now or are the issue here, but once again: they are talking about what other emails should be marked as clasified.
Classified data should only be sent on a classified email system, which essentially means never sent over the broader internet (rather there are other networks not connected to the normal/everyday internet which handles most email). So there shouldn’t be any question of public vs private (all classified networks are government-run, AFAIK).
But people screw this up all the time, usually by not knowing the data they were sending is classified.