The Prime Directive driving bad Clinton coverage.

Updated by Matthew [email protected]@vox.com Oct 31, 2016, 12:10p

The latest Hillary Clinton email revelations arose out of an unrelated investigation into Anthony Weiner’s sexting. The best way to understand this odd hopscotch is through the Prime Directive of Clinton investigations: We know the Clintons are guilty; the only question is what are they guilty of and when will we find the evidence?

So somehow an investigation that once upon a time was about a terrorist attack on an American consulate becomes an inquiry into Freedom of Information Act compliance, which shifts into a question about handling of classified material. A probe of sexting by the husband of a woman who works for Clinton morphs into a quest for new emails, and if the emails turn out not to be new at all (which seems likely), it will morph into some new questions about Huma Abedin’s choice of which computers to use to check her email.

Clinton has been very thoroughly investigated, and none of the earlier investigations came up with any crimes. So now the Prime Directive compels her adversaries to look under a new rock and likewise compels cable television and many major newspapers to treat the barest hint of the possibility of new evidence that might be damning as a major development.

It’s the same drive that led to Bill Clinton’s impeachment trial on the grounds that he had perjured himself to try to cover up an affair that was uncovered in an investigation that was originally supposed to be looking into a years-old Arkansas land deal on which the Clintons had lost money. The Whitewater investigation did not reveal any crimes. So rather than wrap things up and consider the Clintons exonerated, the investigators went looking under other rocks and came up with Monica Lewinsky.

-snip-

http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/10/31/13474116/clinton-prime-directive

FBI Director James B. Comey sent an ominously worded but content-free letter to members of Congress on Friday apprising them that additional emails had been found that “appear to be pertinent” to the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s email server. But wait: The FBI didn’t know what is in the emails. (A warrant to review their contents was reportedly obtained on Sunday.) One has to question then how he even knew they were pertinent to Clinton, let alone significant. They could all be duplicates of things we have seen. (Other reports suggest none of them came from her server.) After a weekend of FBI and Justice Department officials struggling via background leaks to make sense of the letter, we are no closer to figuring out why Comey chose to make such a big splash with so little information.

Pete Williams reported that Justice Department officials “cited long-standing policies against disclosing details of investigations that are underway or taking actions that could affect an election, especially in the period leading up to one.” He continued, “That was especially so, they said, given that FBI agents have not yet analyzed the newly discovered e-mails to see if they contain classified information, the central issue in the investigation of the Clinton private e-mail server.”

Comey defenders say that he was between the proverbial rock and a hard place. If it came out after the election that these emails were relevant he would have been accused of hiding the ball. That’s not a rock and a hard place — it’s Comey trying to protect himself from second guessing.

If he had not sent the letter and was asked after the election why the potential for more information was not disclosed, he would/should have answered as follows:

-snip-

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2016/10/31/comey-was-not-defending-the-justice-system/?utm_term=.f0cd82b87de1&wpisrc=nl_popns&wpmm=1

By Paul Waldman October 31 at 1:04 PM

While we may get another scandal later this week (and why not), it would be fitting if this was how the 2016 presidential election ended: with the media in an utter frenzy and Republicans carried aloft on a wave of joyous outrage over a story about Hillary Clinton that has literally zero substance to it, but consists only of speculation about hypothetical crimes that someone might have committed.

This is what happens when a party nominates Donald Trump to represent it. The Republican reaction to the James Comey mess highlights the moral and psychological compromises the GOP has made in order to justify its choice, and this will poison our politics for years to come.

Right now there are basically two kinds of Republicans, if we set aside that small number who have decided that they simply cannot support Trump. There are the enthusiastic Trump supporters, and then there are the reluctant ones, who find him repellent but nonetheless prefer him to the alternative. Both these groups have convinced themselves that Hillary Clinton is not merely wrong on the issues or even unethical, but positively evil, a figure of such transcendent malevolence that American politics has never seen anything like her before.

Consider this poll out today from Politico and Morning Consult, which asked whether respondents agreed with Donald Trump’s assertion that, as the poll read, “the issues around Clinton’s emails are worse than Watergate.” Eighty-two percent of Republicans said they agreed. Eighty-two percent.

-snip-

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2016/10/31/gop-hatred-of-clinton-will-poison-our-politics-for-years-to-come/?utm_term=.7b6f3c264216&wpisrc=nl_popns&wpmm=1

-snip-

The Daily Beast reports that pro-Trump white nationalist William Johnson has recorded a robo-call that’s being delivered to voters in Utah that explains why they should forsake McMullin and stay on the Trump Train.

“Hello, My name is William Johnson,” the call begins. “I am a farmer and a white nationalist. I make this call against Evan McMullin and in support of Donald Trump.”

Right off the bat, Johnson errs in identifying himself as a “white nationalist,” as white nationalist support for Trump is one thing that has turned many Mormons off to his candidacy in the first place. Johnson then brings out the big guns and tells the voters the real reason they should stay away from supporting McMullin: Because he’s gay and has lots of gay people in his life.

“Evan has two mommies,” Johnson explains. “His mother is a lesbian, married to another woman. Evan is okay with that. Indeed Evan supports the Supreme Court ruling legalizing gay marriage. Evan is over 40 years old and is not married and doesn’t even have a girlfriend. I believe Evan is a closet homosexual.” It should be noted that there is no evidence to show that Evan McMullin is actually gay.

Listen to the whole call yourself below:

http://www.rawstory.com/2016/10/desperate-pro-trump-white-nationalist-spams-utah-voters-with-calls-about-evan-mcmullin-being-gay/

By MATT SHUHAM Published OCTOBER 31, 2016, 3:09 PM EDT

The chairman of the far-right House Freedom Caucus said Monday that FBI Director James Comey was “probably” wrong to announce the discovery of new emails that may be related to his agency’s investigation of Hillary Clinton’s private server.

“I think this was probably not the right thing for Comey to do—the protocol here—to come out this close to an election, but this whole case has been mishandled and now it is what it is,” Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) told Fox News radio host Brian Kilmeade in an interview, as flagged by BuzzFeed.

“Quite frankly, because he had done the press conference and all the things he had before he probably did have to send a letter to Congress like he did last week,” Jordan continued, referring to Comey’s unusual press conference in July where he announced he would not recommend that the Justice Department prosecute Clinton.

“I would argue all of this has been wrong from the get go in the way it’s been handled,” Jordan said.


-snip-

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/jim-jordan-criticizes-comey-letter-clinton

Even J. Edgar Hoover never tampered with a contest in the way that Comey’s FBI is doing now.

MICHAEL TOMASKY

10.31.16 1:21 PM ET

-snip-

I said this is shaping up to be a Third-World election above. Let me spell that out in a little more detail, because it’s staggering—or used to be—to think of the United States of America in these terms. The FBI is our chief domestic police and surveillance agency. It is our equivalent, in other words, of an interior ministry domestic police force in a developing-world nation.

If we Americans were watching an election unfold in, say, a Latin American country, and the head of the domestic police force did what Comey did, we’d be chortling our heads off at their backward, thuggish ways. The Organization of American States would be launching an investigation (come to think of it, the United States is an OAS member; someone should deliver a complaint to their architecturally enchanting door, just a block from the White House).

If anything, in developing nations, there have been some efforts in recent years to take the power of overseeing elections away from interior ministries and hand it to (ostensibly) independent commissions. In 2013, after some controversies we all know about, Iran took oversight of its elections out of their interior ministry and gave it to a newly created board. Iran.

No, the FBI doesn’t run our elections. But Comey has opened up the possibility that the outcome could hinge on actions taken by our national domestic police operation. It’s constitutionally and ethically shocking.

Yes, the bureau has always been political. And yes, its rank-and-file has always leaned heavily Republican. And yes, there has always been, beyond ideology, a culture clash between the Bureau—with its deep northeastern, Irish-Catholic, working and middle class roots—and the Ivy League toffs who have traditionally run the government, especially when the Democrats win elections. The FBI, Pat Moynihan once famously quipped, is “filled with Fordham graduates keeping tabs on Harvard men in the State Department.”

-snip-

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/10/31/james-comey-puts-thumb-on-scale-brings-third-world-style-election-to-america.html

Source: Talking Points Memo

In a letter Monday, Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-IA) asked FBI Director James Comey for more information about his Friday announcement that the agency is looking into emails "pertinent" to its investigation of Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server as secretary of state.

Grassley also suggested that the Justice Department may have withheld investigative tools from the FBI, undermining its ability to investigate Clinton's server.

"If the FBI is denied the ability to gather evidence through compulsory means, Secretary Clinton and her aides have enormous leverage to negotiate extraordinary concessions in exchange for voluntary cooperation," he wrote. Grassley said that his concerns were "magnified" by the lack of detail in Comey's letter.

"Needless to say, it is disturbing if political appointees at the Department of Justice are inappropriately withholding compulsory tools from the FBI, forcing agents to depend on a subject or target’s consent to gather evidence, which undercuts the FBI’s ability to do its job and ultimately obtain justice," Grassley wrote.

-snip-

Read more: http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/grassley-suggests-doj-interefered-with-fbi

Source: Talking Points Memo

Clinton opened the early voting event in Kent, Ohio by apologizing again for her use of the server as secretary of state, but arguing that the FBI already learned all it needed to know about her emails in its initial investigation.

"I am sure a lot of you may be asking what this new email story is about and why in the world the FBI would decide to jump into an election with no evidence of any wrong doing," she said. "And with just days to go. That is a good question."

"First of all, for those of you who are concerned about my use of personal email, I understand. As I said, I'm not making excuses, I understand and I regret it," she continued. "They should look at them. And I'm sure they will reach the same conclusion they did when they looked at my emails for the last year. There is no case here."

Clinton argued there are bigger issues on the line than her emails, which the FBI found during a separate investigation into former Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY), the estranged husband of top Clinton aide Huma Abedin. "I think most people decided a long time ago what they think about all of this. Now people are focusing on choosing a president and commander-in-chief for the United States of America," Clinton said. "Did any of you see the debate? Well, I think it was important, because I had a chance to talk about my 30 years of public service, my plans for our country, and people could weigh that against what my opponent has done and said."

###

Read more: http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/clinton-no-case-here-fbi-emails-announcement

Source: MSNBC

10/31/16 08:40 AM—UPDATED 10/31/16 09:22 AM

By Steve Benen

-snip-

Yesterday, however, Trump’s team said it’s time to give up and stop waiting. Trump’s running mate, Indiana Gov. Mike Pence, made matters clear to NBC News’ Chuck Todd on “Meet the Press” yesterday.



Around the same time on ABC’s “This Week,” Kellyanne Conway, Trump’s campaign manager, said something similar, once again arguing that the materials – including the returns that aren’t under audit – can’t be disclosed because “we’re under audit.”

-snip-

Read more: http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/team-trump-admits-public-wont-see-candidates-tax-returns?cid=eml_mra_20161031