101–110 of 319 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree, it is! But that still doesn't mean people (or, at least, swing voters) actually care.
Voting for trump has got to be more loathsome to most that putting up with Clinton's shenanigans.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The letter states "referred to the fact that the FBI had completed it's investigation". Then the letter states "I agreed that the FBI should take appropriate investigative steps designed to allow.... whether they contain classified information". In plain English, the case was closed, but now there is new evidence and we're investigating it. Sounds like 're-opening' to me.
They are in fact re-opening so they can ammend the findings. If it is determined that new emails warrant charges, she may be charged. The real news story here is that this is what everyone will be talking about for the next weekend, that's three days, with a response by her on Monday. So, maybe four days. That's more than 30% of the remaining election cycle. As Trump would say. This is big league.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This generally seems like a poor signal. People are very bad at reporting what affects their voting decision and a little better at reporting how they will vote. I would be much more apt to believe this was an important factor if we see a shift in the tracking polls or a significant shift in another.
> I haven't seen any numbers that indicate the nation cares either way on this Regardless of if it will affect their vote (some it will, some it won't), people absolutely do care.
To say the obvious: There is great risk of the FBI and/or Comey trying to influence the outcome of the election. Earlier, when Comey said Clinton had been "extremely careless", it seemed to overstep his bounds: He played judge and jury, and convicted her without trial. To do this two weeks before the election raises very serious questions about the U.S.'s most fundamental institutions, rule of law, and democracy. Eve…
It's not a partisan concern and we should be concerned about the rule of law...except in this situation? Because that's what it sounds like you are saying.
A society that lets its leaders do whatever they want without repercussions but "lesser" people get punished is not one particularly concerned about the rule of law. Why would we not want the FBI doing its job?
The big problem with this announcement is that the letter only says "we found some emails and we are reviewing". But in news cycle it will get translated to a guilty verdict and possibly influence election outcome. Shouldn't they have reviewed the emails to see if there is classified information before sending out a letter like this ? Comey surely knew that this letter will be a big deal.
As much as I would like this to be true, I think that's a pretty biased interpretation of his letter. My reading would be this: "We found some new emails. They're relevant, but we don't know if they're important. We're looking into it." What I find interesting is the timing of this letter and, possibly, the fact that he wrote it at all . But we can't judge the significance of those without knowing if this is standard…
> Or this type of letter could be highly unusual, especially days before a presidential election.
I can't imagine Comey sending that letter out this close to the election without having something actionable. He knows full well the impact that even the allegation that something is there would have.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The e-mails should have put her in prison, and they would have put anyone else in the same situation in prison. But you're right, with her being her, they're a complete nonissue. They simply don't matter at all.
"Scooter" Libby leaked the name of a CIA agent and got pardoned. It's time for Obama to pardon Hillary on this.
Obama pardoning Hillary might prove to voters that the system really is corrupt... That could backfire in a big way.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree, it is! But that still doesn't mean people (or, at least, swing voters) actually care.
Voting for trump has got to be more loathsome to most that putting up with Clinton's shenanigans.
edit: referring to the claim that Clinton voters aren't voting for clinton