Home / General / James Comey stole the 2016 presidential election for Donald Trump, full stop

James Comey stole the 2016 presidential election for Donald Trump, full stop

Comments
/
/
/
1312 Views

Josh Marshall received the following from a former federal prosecutor with deep experience in public corruption investigations and prosecutions:

I’ve reviewed the redacted search warrant that the Court unsealed today.

It confirms what we assumed all along: (1) prior to seeking the warrant and to Comey issuing his letter, the FBI had no idea whether these were new emails, or duplicates of emails they previously reviewed–all they could see was non-content header information (to and from); (2) the FBI had no information to suggest that the emails were improperly withheld from them previously; and (3) the FBI had no facts to justify the urgency in seeking a review of the emails prior to the election. This latter point is key. Generally, DOJ policy commands that prosecutors and agents refrain from taking investigative steps (even non-public steps like seeking search warrants) within 60 days of an election in a politically sensitive matter.Bottom line: nothing new, no urgency, no obstruction, no reason to defy longstanding DOJ policy and risk affecting the election. And there was simply no basis for Comey’s decision to make matters worse by issuing a public letter to Congress.

If the prospect of a Trump-appointed FBI chief weren’t so scary, there is no question that Comey should be unemployed right now.

The last sentence is probably correct as a pragmatic matter, but Comey should be in prison, not merely unemployed (given that the GOP does not bother itself with such trivial details as to whether its targets have actually broken any laws, there will be no reason not to return the favor going forward).

Republicans have flat-out stolen two of the last five presidential elections. This is not a metaphor. This is a literal statement of fact. In both cases extremely powerful institutions within the federal government egregiously violated their own rules to hand an election to a candidate who, in the first case, had actually lost it already, and in the second, was about to lose it if not for the illegitimate intervention.

So the way I see it, Democrats have got a couple of presidential elections to steal back before we call this even.

Steal a little and they throw you in jail
Steal a lot and they make you king

FacebookTwitterGoogle+Share
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Google+
  • Linkedin
  • Pinterest
  • RonC

    I’d suggest that those who are making 6 and 7 figures a year to advise the Democratic party about the elections are not earning their 6 or 7 figures a year. Nor have they for a couple of decades at least.

    Or it’s all a big show and as someone else here suggested, perhaps the Democrats really are the Washington Generals of American politics.

    • jamesepowell

      I’d suggest that a major problem with the election campaigns is the disconnect between what I’d call the Democratic policy generators – think tanks, unions, and other associations – and the Democratic policy makers.

      And I’m not going all lefty purist single payer he didn’t even try, but I am saying that when elections roll around, our candidates rarely have a long & well known history of any particular Democratic policies. It’s flavor of the year tempered by Beltway imposed caution.

      Why, for example, does it take a bunch of working stiffs to bring out the minimum age issue? Why isn’t every single Democrat singing the same damn song?

      • Captain Splendid

        If you spend time on conservative sites, they’re more than happy to tie the $15/hour minimum wage to democrats and liberals, so I’d think we already own it. Same thing with abortion, gun control, climate change and a host of other issues.

        The problem’s not singing, it’s getting rid of idiots like Manchin. Which we’re apparently doing.

  • Lit3Bolt

    But it was totally worth it for all of the bipartisan comity and media goodwill Obama earned with nominating a Republican to such a key post.

    • Cassiodorus

      Who needs enemies when we will screw ourselves?

      • McKingford

        A liberal is someone who won’t even take his own side in an argument.

  • rm

    I think I prefer this as a bracing truth — we do not have a democracy and the rule of law is being abused and broken — to the discussions of the elections that take all the nuances into account and play out what the party strategy should be.

    We are not in Congress, or party leaders in the states, so strategy isn’t really up to us. Fully embracing the truth can help us generate the appropriately angry and uncompromising response that the times require. Maybe becoming party leaders in our states or localities will be part of the response. But for most of us, pressure and protest are all we can really do, and the tone and content of that protest will be different if we acknowledge that democracy is an ideal we’ve only occasionally come close to achieving, and is on the ropes right now.

    • SatanicPanic

      I have had this weird thought lately that is something like relief. We don’t have to worry about the collapse of these creaky institutions anymore because they already collapsed. We may be in the middle of a non-violent (so far) civil war, but at least we know what we have to do, and we know that what we’re fighting for is right. Given the choice I’d much rather be celebrating a Hillary victory right now, but I’m trying to look on ths bright side.

    • Snuff curry

      We are not in Congress, or party leaders in the states, so strategy isn’t really up to us. Fully embracing the truth can help us generate the appropriately angry and uncompromising response that the times require.

      As we’ve been reminded, though, angry and uncompromising — in the form of a “popular uprising” — is exactly what the GOP strategy was in 2000 if it had been Gore who’d gained the requisite EC numbers but lost the popular vote. Quiet stoicism and stiff upper lips, an unwillingness to appear like sore losers or to admit out loud that the bullies hit you even after you handed over your lunch money, are not, in fact, never have been, as you say, the only possible alternative to a tantrum and a lawsuit. Look at the Republicans: they stole an election and are still spoiling for a fight and crying foul.

      • so-in-so

        Karl Rove talked about a “permanent Conservative Majority” in the Bush the Lessor administration. Clearly they have labored on that goal rather successfully since.

        Maya Angelou said that when someone shows you who they are, you really need to pay attention. The GOP has done that in spades.

        We need to remind ourselves of those facts, together, going forward.

        Every Day.

  • xq

    The problem is that you have to actually control institutions in order to use them to steal elections.

    • Brad Nailer

      The Press is the big one. Control that–which the Republicans more or less do–and you control what people know and believe. Democrats keep coming up with great programs and policies–undeniably a good thing–but until they can figure out how to get control of the public opinion pipeline and make people understand the import of these programs and policies, it’s going to be one ass kicking after another.

      “I don’t think he’s really going to do it.” I mean, seriously?

  • Alex.S

    I just continue to be amazed and angry that Comey wrote a letter to Congress saying he might have to alter his testimony and they totally found new evidence WITHOUT HAVING A WARRANT.

    • Alex.S

      After the edit… but what would Comey have done if the judge had denied the warrant? “Sorry, it turns out I will not amend my testimony as I am legally barred from looking at any potentially new information”?

      • tsam

        ‘LIBERAL JUDGE HANDS ELECTION TO CLINTON’

      • delazeur

        I feel like that would have just intensified all the claims of liberal conspiracy.

    • (((max)))

      I just continue to be amazed and angry that Comey wrote a letter to Congress saying he might have to alter his testimony and they totally found new evidence WITHOUT HAVING A WARRANT.

      That’s because they TOTALLY FOUND NEW EVIDENCE WITHOUT HAVING A WARRANT. (That is to say, they read all those emails without a warrant, didn’t find anything, decided to write a letter to Congress and then get a warrant and then afterwards delayed telling everyone what they knew about the emails they had read before they sent the letter, which was they didn’t have jack.)

      The sticky part (pun not really intended but given Comey…) is that I have been wondering if Wiener in fact did what he was accused of. It is not for nothing that one says that the FBI arranged to have terrorist attacks busted just before 9/11 for 13 years, and thus one can easily suspect that they just wanted a look at the computers of… Huma Abedin, not Wiener. Wiener was just the excuse.

      Various people keep talking about the Russians, but it’s Sideshow Vlad compared to the FBI and Comey.

      max
      [‘Hey, maybe some people can rediscover the merits of the 4th amendment.’]

  • rewenzo

    Unfortunately, we can’t do anything to James Comey now, nor would we, because his replacement would be worse. But he goes on the Revenge List. At some point in the future, James Comey will need the goodwill of the democrats either to avoid an unpleasant situation or because he wants an honor. We should fuck him, no matter how petty it looks. Mitch McConnel goes on this list too. Not so much as a post office or DMV can be allowed to bear his name.

    Additionally, this is why I believe in an all powerful god that judges us all after we die. Comey is gonna get judged and be found wanting.

    • Alex.S

      Don’t worry, Comey will take the fall when Trump orders the FBI to lethally break up protests trying to stop pipelines and/or resource extraction on Native American lands!

      • Comey was willing to throw an election…what’s a little literal blood on his hands?

        • Given the increase in hate crimes that has followed the election, I think a fair case could be made that he already has blood on his hands.

          • Pathetic…

            Troll.

            • You really aren’t very subtle, are you, Al?

              • rachelmap

                These troll threads are so weird; they’re like Groot’s dialog from Guardians of the Galaxy.

                Hey, does anybody else this comment section be more fun if the trolls were read as “I am Groot” instead?

                • so-in-so

                  Except Groot was a good guy, and likable, and had more nuance in his single line (admittedly with the advantage of speaking it, but most trolls haven’t any more nuance in person).

                • Make America Groot again.

                  But yeah, so-in-so has a good point.

          • Pathetic…

            Troll.

  • nemdam

    But if we keep pointing out how egregiously unethical/illegal major institutions acted to throw the election to Trump, and that investigation of these acts should not be considered a partisan issue, then the Democrats can never reflect on how they can do better. Oh, and Hillary sucks because only horrible candidates can't overcome this, and she obviously could've if she wasn't so arrogant to not campaign in Wisconsin.

    • Pathetic…

      Troll.

      • Whatever tribe doesn’t have you in it is fine by me.

  • This is perhaps the least surprising news I have seen all year. My question is: Where do we go from here? A legitimate case can be made that we no longer have a functioning democracy. This certainly was not a free or fair election, and I expect what follows after the GOP regains control of the Supreme Court and institutes voter suppression on steroids to make us look back on this year nostalgically. Regardless, a legitimate case can be made that the entire country’s civil rights were violated by e.g. the FBI’s interference with the election, which should illegitimise the election results. But… what the fuck do we do about it? I legitimately do not see a path forward from here.

    There’s a decent chance that I won’t even stay in the country after this, at least until the neo-Nazis are forced to crawl back into the slime from which they came. But even if I leave, I don’t want the country to keep going down this path, not least because it’s my home, and more pragmatically because it’s still one of the most influential countries on the planet. Activism such as Erik and others have been writing about is nice, but it doesn’t mean much if there’s no way for us to win elections. And I don’t see a way for us to win elections after Jim Crow Mk. II gets instated.

    • SNF

      Step one is to make sure that elections actually happen in 2020.

      We need to stop taking things for granted, especially if we have a major terror attack or war over the next few years that can be used as a justification to clamp down on political rights.

      • Pathetic…

        Troll.

        • petesh

          That would be 2018

          • StellaB

            Most emphatically, that would be 2018.

    • Pathetic…

      Troll.

    • Pathetic…

      Troll.

  • MPAVictoria

    Whatever your criticisms of the Hillary campaign, your suspicions of Russian involvement and the awful job done by the media I think this is basically correct. Comey may have destroyed the world and in a just world he would be in jail.

  • patrick II

    but Comey should be in prison, not merely unemployed

    Good luck on finding twelve jurors, none of whom are a Trump fantasist. There is hardly a thing to be done anymore, from healthcare to the economy to foreign policy and particularly upholding the law equally for all, that will not be sidetracked by people living in the fantasy world created by FOX news and talk radio.

    • yet_another_lawyer

      Hypothetically speaking, the vote in DC was something like 282K for Hillary and 12K for Donald. I’ll take those odds.

      Of course, we’re pretty much in Fantasyland territory…

      • rm

        Their alternative world of anti-facts is the scariest thing about them. I can talk with someone who believes that Democrats are the crooks who steal elections, that Republican policies work, that global warming is a hoax etc., etc., and I am right and he is wrong, but he thinks I am the one with a bubble of fake news. Reality is reality and should correct many of these false notions, but unfortunately only after a long long time in the retrospect of history. Two hundred years from now I will be able to tell him, see? My facts were true and yours were lies.

        And when Miami drowns. Though I expect they will blame that on Democrats, gay people, or Haitians.

  • Ghostship

    A “lawyer” gives his opinion without putting his name to it. Sorry, but it’s worthless.
    He also shows that he doesn’t know what he’s talking about:

    (1) prior to seeking the warrant and to Comey issuing his letter, the FBI had no idea whether these were new emails, or duplicates of emails they previously reviewed–all they could see was non-content header information (to and from)

    An e-mail header contains a bit more non-content information than that:

    From: Jennifer Palmieri
    Date: Sat, 2 May 2015 11:23:56 -0400
    Message-ID:
    Subject: WJC NBC interview
    To: H , John Podesta ,
    Huma Abedin , Robby Mook ,
    Kristina Schake

    So they couldn’t use the Subject field (content-related) but they could use the Message-ID field which would allow them to identify which e-mails they’d seen before and which they hadn’t. Even then a combination of the From, To and Date fields is probably unique enough to distinguish between two e-mails. The FBI had already established that Hillary Clinton’s lawyers had not been particularly careful when it came to deciding which e-mails to delete as personal. If her lawyers had done their job properly when they deleted HRC’s personal e-mails, the FBI would never have had to apply for that warrent and that letter would never have been sent, but that would have required her to spend money on lawyers going through each letter by hand instead of electronically filtering them. So if you’re going to blame Comey then you should also blame HRC for being a cheapskate.
    So now you’re in “Blame Comey” mode, does that mean that you no longer believe that it was Putin who threw the election Trump’s way?
    However, I doubt the Comey letter had much of an impact on HRCs dire performance in the election just as I doubt that Putin did.
    Please, no more “but she won the popular vote” replies because it doesn’t fucking matter anymore. And it’s about time people started blaming HRC for making Trump electable.
    And I should add that my understanding of the e-mail deletions has changed but she still messed that up.

    • jim, some guy in iowa

      nah, I think we can keep blaming you, the kind of stupid fucks who kept poisoning the well just because it made you feel all tingly and “leftist”

    • Ghostship

      (2) the FBI had no information to suggest that the emails were improperly withheld from them previously;

      The “lawyer”‘s second point is also wrong:

      Clinton said her lawyers “went through every single email” to determine which ones were personal and which were work-related, and that they were “overly inclusive” in which ones were provided to the State Department. Comey said the lawyers did not go through every email. Rather, they used header information and search terms to identify work-related emails, and, he said, it is “highly likely” they missed some.

      • Hogan

        Clinton’s lawyers say one thing; Comey says something else. Case. Closed.

        • Ghostship

          Can’t you read.

          Clinton said her lawyers

          No, it’s Clinton said one thing, it wasn’t here lawyers. Big difference. She has a history of lying but since you seem to think the sun shines out of her arse, I doubt you believe that.

          • Hogan

            OH DO tell me more about motivated reasoning.

          • ColBatGuano

            So not only do you support Trump, you’re also a big Comey fan. What a surprise.

          • JMP

            Huh? Hillary Clinton has a history of being honest; to claim that she has “a history of lying” is just a complete and total ironic lie you liar.

    • alexceres

      Except it was clear that the FBI never checked the message-id field or filtered out any of the previously seen emails before applying for this warrant. The agent’s testimony that there is probable cause they contain classified information is basically “no facts == probable cause” which would be perjury for little people. They had no idea about any of this, and just bullshitted their way through the warrant application.

      • Davis X. Machina

        “The bitch is WINNING! SOMETHING must BE DONE!” is a kind of probable cause.

    • rea

      You think that “WJC NBC interview” gives probable cause to believe that a crime has been committed and that the object to be searched contains evidence of that crime? And you know, the 2015 date of the email pretty much rules out the notion that this was an email sent by HRC when she was secretary of state . .

    • Comey had no positive reason to violate policy with his bullshit letter. He had no positive evidence of new and relevant info in the emails. Even if HRC’s method for determining an email was personal was overly aggressive (and I see no specific public information that this is the case — vague innuendo yes, specific info no,) there is no reason to believe that there would be anything relevant and new in this client-side copy of emails. The only reasonable conclusion is that his intention was to influence the election. I will damn well blame him for that.

      • StellaB

        My understanding is that a lawyèr was employed to read her emails and pick out the personal ones.

    • A “lawyer” gives his opinion without putting his name to it. Sorry, but it’s worthless.

      Is that a general principle of yours, that anonymous sources are invariably worthless?

      if you’re going to blame Comey then you should also blame HRC for being a cheapskate.

      Nonsense. An FBI Director has a professional and ethical obligation not to use his position to influence the outcome of an election. The subject of an FBI investigation is under no such obligation to spend extra money on lawyers on the offchance that the FBI might decide to go an additional fishing expedition, enabling its director to abuse his power.

      So now you’re in “Blame Comey” mode, does that mean that you no longer believe that it was Putin who threw the election Trump’s way?

      Because only one person could possibly have had a decisive influence on the outcome. It’s one or the other, Campos! Make up your mind already!

      However, I doubt the Comey letter had much of an impact on HRCs dire performance in the election just as I doubt that Putin did.

      Your doubts are worthless.

      Please, no more “but she won the popular vote” replies because it doesn’t fucking matter anymore.

      Well, not to you, but so fucking what?

      it’s about time people started blaming HRC for making Trump electable.

      Well, YOU have. Are you a person? Arguably yes (I withhold judgement). Are there other people who have? Bingo, people HAVE started blaming HRC. In fact, they started quite some time ago. You have done it incessantly over weeks and weeks of tedium. If, however, you are demanding that we join in your inane chorus you will have to come up with better arguments. It does not actually follow from the fact that Trump was “elected”, and that Clinton was his opponent, that Clinton “made Trump electable”. For example, such an argument assumes that Bernie Sanders would have been a dead cert to beat Trump. However, this is mere assumption which you have not, to my knowledge, ever bothered to support with anything approaching argument.

      • Pathetic…

        Troll.

        • Trump was elected because Whites have finally woken up to the identity politics game and started voting as an ethnic interest group.

          Trump received roughly the same percentage of the white vote as Romney did in 2012. And majorities of whites have favored the Republican party since 1968. So…just started? I think not.

          “Anti-Racism” produced Identiarian white politics.

          What brand of politics is not ‘identity politics”? Yes, it was totally the fault of the civil rights movement. Before, there was no white identity politics or racism- if one omits Jim Crow. In the same way as Trump totes won the popular vote if you assume California is not part of this country.

          • Pathetic…

            Troll.

            • Whites haven’t practiced identity politics for 50 years

              LOL

              we (as a People) are increasingly subjected to hate, mockery, ridicule,, and dispossession

              No…I subject you to mockery and ridicule because of your absurd beliefs. Whatever “people” you may believe yourself to be a part of, know that I do not identify in any with it and that has nothing to do with the color of my skin.

              the country we created for “ourselves and or posterity”

              You mean the land that was stolen from its original inhabitants, many of whom were murdered in the process. And you proudly own that genocide? You, sir, are indeed worthy of mockery and ridicule.

              • Oh, yeah, Al proudly owns that genocide. It excites him. Killing a race; a race of vermin, of untermensch, the thought of doing that excites him. He wipes his greasy hands across his t-shirt and sets him fingers flying across the keyboard as he fantasizes of being a storm trooper bravely murdering babies and old people and smearing their blood on his face. Thing is, mom won’t let him leave the house til he finishes the dishes, and even then his stingray bicycle has a flat tire, and all the kids avoid him when he walks down the halls at school. So he sits in his dark room eating his KFC (like Donald does!) and feeds his fantasy.

                • Pathetic…

                  Troll.

              • Pathetic…

                Troll.

                • jim, some guy in iowa

                  ah, you gave ’em smallpox and killed ’em off that way. They’d have driven you into the ocean otherwise

                • Pathetic…

                  Troll.

            • (((Malaclypse)))

              but as we (as a People) are increasingly subjected to hate, mockery, ridicule,

              Technically, we mock you because you are an entitled idiot with delusions of adequacy. Your crackerhood is just icing on the cake.

          • Pathetic…

            Troll.

            • So, y’all are going to take living in denial to a whole new level.

              • Pathetic…

                Troll.

                • What, are you proposing a new republic that will last a thousand years?

                • (((Malaclypse)))

                  Subtext rapidly becoming text, cracker.

            • You demand whitewashed history in which children are brainwashed by racist propaganda

              Sure, white men still hold considerable advantages in wealth and employment…but it’s not enough for you

              Hatred is the cancer, and you are spreading it.

              What you choose to believe has no bearing on matters of fact.

              No longer? When exactly did you ever “applaud” the trans-gendered?

              • When exactly did you ever “applaud” the trans-gendered?

                Well, there was this little bar Al used to go to that had quite an interesting floor show…

              • Pathetic.

                Troll.

            • celticdragonchick

              Alexander:

              You know…it is because of neo fascists like you that I am one of the progressives around here who does, in fact own guns. Several, in fact. I also happen to be one of those trans women your sort want to rape and kill, although not necessarily in that order.

              So just be aware of this, Al…

              When you come knocking on my door to do something, I won’t shoot back.

              I’ll shoot first.

              I’ll shoot quite a bit. I was a helicopter doorgunner in the army. I had no problem with engaging whatever target that stood between me and getting home alive.

              Right now, people like you are starting to look a lot like people that don’t want me to get home alive each day. I’ll respond accordingly if you want to get to business. High heels or not.

              You can play your internet tough guy bullshit in here. I am not playing. I am not kidding around. I am not acting for the benefit of the thread or pretending to be “tough”. I am not “tough” and do not care to be known as such.

              I will, however, do anything…anything…to protect myself and my family and I will absolutely kill somebody who acts, talks and thinks like you and who threatens me and my loved ones in any way.

              You are an enemy of my country, and my personal enemy as well, so don’t make the mistake of looking for me or anybody like me to do your krystalnacht bit with. Just a bit of advice.

              • Pathetic…

                Troll.

                • celticdragonchick

                  All I need is a chance against someone like you.

                • celticdragonchick

                  With that, I am done in here for tonight. I hope the mods will please drop the banhammer on this filth.

                • Pathetic…

                  Troll.

      • Ghostship

        Is that a general principle of yours, that anonymous sources are invariably worthless?

        No, but I tend to be suspicious of all anonymous “goverment officials” unless they’re whistleblowers and it’s quite obvious on this matter, this one isn’t.

        The subject of an FBI investigation is under no such obligation to spend extra money on lawyers on the offchance that the FBI might decide to go an additional fishing expedition, enabling its director to abuse his power.

        She wasn’t the subject of an FBI investigation when she was asked to supply the e-mails. The DoS had received a FOIA request and requested of several SoS that they supply their work-related e-mails but they could delete personal ones. The trouble was that Clinton deleted work-related ones she was obligated to supply because she was a cheapskate.

        Well, not to you, but so fucking what?

        What’s more important, it probably doesn’t matter to the majority of Americans.

        For example, such an argument assumes that Bernie Sanders would have been a dead cert to beat Trump. However, this is mere assumption which you have not, to my knowledge, ever bothered to support with anything approaching argument.

        It’s debatable but it doesn’t interest me. What does is that Clinton stands again in 2020 with the same result.

        • Blah blah blah, Ghostship. You claim that of course Clinton ‘made trump electable”, then when I ask you to support that claim with an argument you say it doesn’t interest you. Why does it not surprise me that you prefer not to try to make an argument for a claim that you have demanded for weeks we accept uncritically?

          Also, you claim that you think we should shut up about the popular vote because a majority of Americans think it’s a non-issue, but the truth is, you want us to shut up about it because you believe it should be a non-issue, and if we stop talking about it, of course it will be. You’re not being very subtle about this, are you?

          Also, the finer details of what Clinton could or not have done when asked to produce work-related e-mails are quite irrelevant to Comey’s professional and moral responsibilities, and the fact that he flagrantly violated them in an abuse of power that almost certainly had a decisive impact on the outcome of the election.

          Your “doubt” that it did have such an impact is indeed worthless, based as it is on the laughable two-part assumption that 1) Only one person should ever be blamed for an election result and 2) That one person in this case MUST be Hillary Clinton

        • Hogan

          No, but I tend to be suspicious of all anonymous “goverment officials” unless they’re whistleblowers and it’s quite obvious on this matter, this one isn’t.

          He can’t be a whistleblower because Comey obviously didn’t abuse his power, which we know because Clinton losing was the right outcome, so Comey helping that along was entirely justified.

    • Philip

      Christ you’re stupid. If you’re going to try to prove your “um actually” credentials by listing an (empty, lol) Message-ID header, why not include the other common ones as well?

      Delivered-To:
      Received-SPF:
      Authentication-Results:
      DKIM-Signature:
      X-Gm-Message-State:
      X-Received: [It has a bunch of these]
      Return-Path:
      Received: [These too]
      From:
      Content-Type:
      Content-Transfer-Encoding:
      Mime-Version:
      Date:
      Subject:
      Message-Id:
      References:
      In-Reply-To:
      To:
      X-Mailer:

      Twit.

      Also yeah it’d take about ten minutes to write a script to do this check. But (and this is the key) they didn’t do that. It’s almost like the goal here was not actually a fair investigation!

      • Ghostship

        why not include the other common ones as well?

        Why should I bother with the others when the ones I mentioned covered my argument and that example was readily available.

        they didn’t do that.

        How do you know?
        TPM mentions

        NBC’s Pete Williams reported on a
        ir via phone on Sunday afternoon, citing a senior law enforcement official, that nearly all of the emails the FBI looked at in its new review were duplicates of emails they had already reviewed during the original investigation. Williams also reported that the FBI’s new review of emails is now “substantially” over.

        The FBI were only interested in work-related e-mails and most but not all of them had already been delivered so you’d expect a lot of duplicates and a few that weren’t

        • Philip

          Date-precise-to-second is already plenty good for uniquifying email, so if you weren’t just showing off “oh look I can click a dropdown in gmail and see email headers” you wouldn’t need to talk about message-id anyway, but sure. And your quote proves my point: he sent the stupid letter before they looked at the headers.

      • Schadenboner

        Where does Ghostship get his water?

        From a “Well, actually…”.

        • postmodulator

          I know the guy who came up with that joke!

          • Schadenboner

            So you are familiar with this Internet tradition?

    • Scott Lemieux

      A “lawyer” gives his opinion without putting his name to it. Sorry, but it’s worthless.

      Many named lawyers have said the same thing, because the conclusion is obvious. The chances that these unread emails was going to reveal an intentional scheme to pass along or destroy classified materials was zero.

      The FBI had already established that Hillary Clinton’s lawyers had not been particularly careful when it came to deciding which e-mails to delete as personal

      Nah.

      However, I doubt the Comey letter had much of an impact on HRC

      Your bare assertions certain mean more than actual evidence ever could.

  • Hogan

    Troll alert–someone send up the Farleysignal.

    • jim, some guy in iowa

      I’m imagining Farley’s Twitter picture in profile in the sky now

      (which, for no good reason is also reminding me of the Mary Worth comic but this not quite the time or place for *that*)

    • petesh

      I apologize for inserting even a minor correction, thereby spoiling the nigh-perfect flow of something that cannot be found in my built-in thesaurus.

  • Pathetic…

    Troll.

  • jim, some guy in iowa

    well, one thing, in a couple of years when trollie’s mom, uncle and aunt have to move in with him because they lost all their no-longer federally insured savings in trump’s CasinoUSA he’ll have less time for indulging in mass murder fantasies

  • Pathetic…

    Troll.

    • “Irradiated”?

      OK, who’s pulling the Gary Ruppert shtick?

      • N__B

        Hopefully, someone wearing gloves.

        • efgoldman

          Hopefully, someone wearing gloves.

          And a mask. Somehow those kkkeyboard kkkommando kkkowards never want to show their faces, real names, or ip addresses.They can dish it out, anonymously.

  • Pathetic…

    Troll.

    • If you’re volunteering to go ever upward into outer space, so much the better

  • Pathetic…

    Troll.

  • humanoid.panda

    I presume that at this point its clear that Ghostship, Noaltcenter, Slothrop and and the Dugin guy are all one and the same person ,right?

    • Pathetic…

      Troll.

      • humanoid.panda

        I also like to maintain healthy dialogue with voices in my head.

        • Alexander Dugin

          Are you a Jew ?

          • jim, some guy in iowa

            are you on meth?

            • humanoid.panda

              Some of my voices are Jewish others are rastafarian. The only thing we can agree on is that Chinese food is yummy, and that the essential motor of world history is bamboo shoots.

              • jim, some guy in iowa

                well, that certainly makes more sense than anything DuggyShip2 comes up with

            • Pathetic…

              Troll.

              • humanoid.panda

                But what about the bamboo shoots?

                • jim, some guy in iowa

                  he found they worked very well during his venture into do-it-yourself trepanning

      • The only thing they get right is that there is no such thing as the individual, only the group,

        Really? And what does the group consist of? Who must be taught what group they even belong to?

        • Pathetic…

          Troll.

    • Possibly Dugin is Ghostship trying on a new troll persona. It is interesting that Ghostship stopped posting the moment Dugin started up.

      • efgoldman

        Possibly Dugin is Ghostship trying on a new troll persona. It is interesting that Ghostship stopped posting the moment Dugin started up.

        GoShit is an ass, and not in the US, and also a troll, but he’s always been careful not to veer into antisemitic and racist bullshit.
        Also he’s Dilan+TJ squared in Hillaryhate, which is really saying something.

  • NewishLawyer

    1. Right-wing media has been telling its listeners for decades that there is nothing legitimate about the Democratic Party. Even the most centerist or conservative Blue Dog Democrat is the second-coming of Trotsky in this world view. A lot of right-wingers simply see liberalism as a totally illegitimate political philosophy and since the Democratic Party is the liberal party, the Democratic Party is legitimate.

    2. Right-wingers seem more likely to go into law enforcement than liberals for obvious reasons.

    3. So if you have enough LEOs who have been fully under the influence of right-wing radio, you have a big problem and that is that they are going to see their job as destroying the Democratic Party and liberalism by all means necessary. They probably think they are doing their patriotic responsibility.

    I have no idea how to fix this problem!

    • humanoid.panda

      But then, it becomes a question of why this sort of thing didn’t happen to Obama, or any number of Democrats who won high profile races to the Senate, etc, etc. I am strongly inclined to think this is less about ideology, and more about the irrational hatred lots of lawndorder folks feel towards the Clintons.

      Anecdotes are not data, but I have a friend who is married to a mid-rank DOD functionary. Since he was terrified by Flynn having voice of president, he voted Clinton. But the amount of mental anguish that decision caused him was simply unfathomable to someone who thinks she is not spawn of devil.. And while the guy was never a big fan of Obama, he never felt this kind of contempt towards him.

      • NewishLawyer

        That’s a fair observation.

      • But the amount of mental anguish that decision caused him was simply unfathomable to someone who thinks she is not spawn of devil.

        That they think she is the most awful person conceivable is what I don’t get. Not having spent time in the right wing internet sewer (although that may chance, as a couple of our trolls seem to be trying to set up a line here), I have been taken aback by the virulence with which people view Clinton. People who I have know for years to be more or less rational completely lose all reason when it comes to her. How do you even find a middle ground with people who live in a completely manufactured reality?

        • humanoid.panda

          This is I think the one thing a lot of people underestimated. To the readership of this blog- i.e largely mainstream liberals, she is just of a run of the mill Democratic politician. To people to the left or right of us, she is the devil.

          • jim, some guy in iowa

            the other thing we underestimated- or over, I’m not sure- was how a lot of people didn’t/don’t think trump will be “that bad”. I think Dilan Esper is on the right track when he talks about trump’s celebrity appeal being much more ingrained than we realized

            • humanoid.panda

              I don’t know about that. Trump is by far the least popular incoming president ever, with his approval ratings pretty much closely following partisanship.

              • jim, some guy in iowa

                true. There was a sense that trump was so bad that a noticeable number of Rs would cross over or not vote, though

                • humanoid.panda

                  Which IMO is strong indication his victory was NOT about his celebrity, but about the fact he was the republican running against the Hildebeast.

          • I’m not sure political ideology has all that much to do with it. I’m more or less an anarchist, and almost certain I’m well to the left of most of the blog regulars here (maybe not Loomis). There was a time when I didn’t care for her much (it ended long before the election, though), but I never thought of her as anything other than a typical Democratic politician.

        • LeeEsq

          My guess is that hatred of the Clintons dates back to Bill Clinton becoming President in 1992 with only 40% of the popular vote because Ross Perot entered the race. The Republicans probably saw that election has theirs and never forgave Clinton for winning it. They had a pretty good run at the Presidency between 1968 and 1992. They just won the Cold War and Gulf War I. There might have been some economic issues but nothing that bad. Than the Clintons, two baby boomers who spent part of the counter culture years as semi-hippies, Bill even had a beard for some time, came along and won the Presidency. This was simply unforgivable.

          • Hogan

            My guess is that hatred of the Clintons dates back to Bill Clinton becoming President in 1992 with only 40% of the popular vote because Ross Perot entered the race.

            It started well before that.

    • alexceres

      It’s time for Democrats to realize and message the republican party is totally hostile to democracy and corrupt. The MSM accepts the “america is a center right country, despite Hillary winning 3M more votes” bullshit story from the right because the left is generally more interested in settling intra party idealogical scores than buckling down on practicalities.

      Also, this like one of many great reasons to end the war on drugs (YAW on poor and colored people) and war on terrorism (YAW on colored people) and slash their funding.

      Supposedly non-partisan institutions that intervene in elections should be re-taught why their predecessors thought choosing sides was a bad idea. If there are no more civil norms, just political power, than we should dispense with the bipartisan facade of bullshit and just exercise power without remorse. These are people planning to take away 50M people’s health care. Literal dying in streets. Actual neo-nazis appointed to government.

      This isn’t normal, this isn’t acceptable, and we should never pretend Republicans are anything else.

      Sure, for the next 4 years that’s not much power. But it can start with Chuck Schumer reprising McConnell’s “No” playbook, and folks working their local and state governments as much as possible. Police departments largely report to local jurisdictions. Go influence your town or city council. They can fire or defund departments engaging in political meddling.

      • humanoid.panda

        It’s time for Democrats to realize and message the republican party is totally hostile to democracy and corrupt. The MSM accepts the “america is a center right country, despite Hillary winning 3M more votes” bullshit story from the right because the left is generally more interested in settling intra party idealogical scores than buckling down on practicalities.

        Look, I know that since we lost everything we do is terrible and the right is an unstoppable juggernaut, but it’s not like the Republicans lacked for internal fights in the last few years, did they? Some level of recrimination and fighting is inevitable after a loss, and there is nothing wrong with that.

    • Brad Nailer

      There is, simply, a sizeable portion of the American electorate who believe that liberalism–no matter who might be wearing its face today–is the source and root of all evil in our society today. Which of course is irrational, since our very political system was at least conceived as a liberal, democratic counterforce to monarchism.

      And for the most part–the most recent high points being the New Deal and the Civil Rights era–we have maintained that liberalism into the present day. Glad you don’t have to work 60 hours a week with no benefits? Thank a liberal. Glad you got to go to public school? Thank a liberal. Glad you get Social Security or you’ve got a pension? Thank a liberal. Sorry you’ve got shitty health care or the market just crashed? Thank a conservative.

      These are facts, but don’t forget that the 2008 market crash was caused–30 years later–by the Community Reinvestment Act and banks having to issue mortgages to poor black people who couldn’t afford them.

  • Vance Maverick

    E. Randol Schoenberg! I knew him in high school as Randy (and he’s incidentally the grandson of Arnold). Visible since then in the recovery of looted artwork, like the Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer. Glad to see he’s on Team Valor in other fields as well.

    • Brad Nailer

      I just watched Woman in Gold. It was satisfying.

  • efgoldman

    Well, this thread is in the shiiter.

    No Troll-B-Gone in the supply closet?

    • This Alexander Dugin troll infestation has spread throughout the thread. A very nasty strain of antisemitism. How do we contact the moderator?

      • jim, some guy in iowa

        lefarkinsblog at the g mail thing (“who are we” upper right of the page)

        • Have sent a message, hopefully many others have already

  • Mike in DC

    In a way, it’s better when assholes share their thoughts openly. The banality of evil on public display. Certainly lacking in profundity or originality.

  • Thanks for the troll cleanup, whoever is responsible. If possible I honestly think it might be advisable to report the IP address to the troll’s ISP and the proper authorities, along with excerpts of the outright genocidal content he posted. This one was particularly vile and there is a non-zero chance of this shitbird actually comitting some kind of crime. I’m not confident that it would result in anything actually being done, but I would feel better if it hpapened regardless.

  • tsam

    This fucking troll needs to get his booger hooks off the letter board before i smack him in his snotlocker.

    • jim, some guy in iowa

      Erik said the other day all the super antisemitic trolling comes from the usual Jenni-rific source. I guess it’s too cold to go down to the train yards and spray paint swastikas on the freight cars

      • yet_another_lawyer

        Global warming will solve that, so it’s basically a win-win.

  • Pingback: Nothing To See Here | Bark Bark Woof Woof()

  • Joe_JP

    The Giants was going to win on a field goal vs. a team most people figured would lose big [though underestimated to some extent] but officials screwed them over.

    This is wrong and troubling on sanctity of officiating levels regardless of the result. But, just to remember, the election came down to paper thin margins there, and any number of things — given the world we live in one or more unfair — could have blown it. Josh Marshall noted this in one of his editorial blogs too, citing the shift from 2012 to 2016 in one of the Rust Belt states.

    So, not really “full stop.” BTW, I simply don’t recall many criticizing Comey’s nomination back when it happened. The “big big mistake” to nominate him stuff seems a bit after the fact from some quarters.

    • Scott Lemieux

      So, not really “full stop.”

      Yes, really, The fact that other variables also affected the outcome is beside the point. He doesn’t egregiously violate procedure and send the letter, Clinton wins. Full stop. Saying “but, though” is a way of mitigating Comey’s responsibility, which it total.

      I simply don’t recall many criticizing Comey’s nomination back when it happened.

      You may not recall it, but it existed.

      • MDrew

        total

        That word. I do not think it means…

  • urd

    Yes, please stop.

    The largest factors that lost Clinton the election: Clinton and her disaster of a campaign.

    But please continue to go after things that don’t require the democrats to analyze why they failed. I’m sure we all want to repeat this again and again.

  • Rob in CT

    I came across this today:

    http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/12/16/13972394/most-common-words-hillary-clinton-speech

    Which isn’t news to most people here.

    The media went nuts over emails and Clinton’s campaign couldn’t get around that. Whether you believe they should’ve been able to is up to you. I can see the argument that they should’ve simply assumed the press would fuck them and come up with something to route right around the MSM.

It is main inner container footer text