Have we reached peak 2016 yet? Since the last post, a mere three hours ago, we have learned not only is the FBI reopening the Clinton email matter, but the basis for the reopening. Recall that I speculated it may have something to do with Wikileaks. See that would make sense and be perfectly logical explanation.
Yeah, I forgot it’s 2016.
It turns out, per sources inside the FBI, the investigation was reopened because of a separate and unrelated criminal investigation. That case? Anthony Weiner Sexting.
Seriously? I mean WTF? Anthony Weiner sending dic picks to teenagers has caused the FBI to notify Congress it is reopening the Clinton case?
Every time you think this year couldn’t get weirder, something like this happens.
This is so utterly bizarre; I’m starting to wonder if we are witnessing a Black Swan Event. What could Anthony Weiner have on his cell phone that would cause the FBI to re-open an investigation in the misuse and mishandling of classified material? Why would he have anything even remotely classified on his phone? He was not, at any time, a State Department employee. He should have nothing remotely classified on his phone. And yet, the FBI seems to think he does.
And for those who claim the FBI isn’t reopening the investigation: if the FBI is reviewing information on Weiner’s phone(s) to see if it is classified and how it impacts the Clinton investigation, then yes, they are reopening their original investigation.
Think about it: less than two weeks before a Presidential Election, FBI agents successfully convinced the Director of the FBI to allow the Bureau to reopen a case involving a major party’s candidate for the presidency based on new evidence. A case the Director had closed on July 5, 2016 when he declared that while Clinton had probably broken the law, 1) no prosecutor who have brought such a case (which is true given the sweet-heart deals handed out to Clinton staffers) and 2) Clinton didn’t intend to break the law (even though the law does not require intent). And this new evidence is of sufficient weight that the Director of the FBI had to notify Congress that the existence of this information alters his testimony before Congressional Committees explaining why he had closed the investigation four months prior.
Even if nothing comes of it, this sucks the oxygen out of the room. People aren’t talking about Donald Trump being a sexual predator. They are talking about Hillary Clinton and her emails and her inability to protect classified information.
This ultimately may not hurt her, but it sure as heck ain’t helping.
A few other thoughts:
-Anyone else starting to think 2016 is the longest set up for a Candid Camera episode?
-I’m still not convinced that this will affect the election outcome. But I’m not convinced that it won’t affect it either.
–ElectionBettingOdds.com is showing at an almost 6% drop in Clinton’s chance of winning, with Trump up to a 21.5% chance. It’s still not much, but the Brexit betting comes to mind. In the final days, Remain was still seen as the result, but that was because most of the money was going that way. What was overlooked was there were more bets on Leave, but because the amounts were so small ($5/$10 equivalent amounts), it wasn’t really registering a change in the chances of the two sides. It would be interesting to see something like that was to happen with this election.
-Let’s give it up for the Johnson/Weld Campaign coming out quickly with a press release dinging Clinton. For once.
-Do you think the Trump campaign is going to swap Donald’s smart phone for a fake one to prevent him from big footing this story?
-Let’s just stop and enjoy the irony that if this was to be the end for Hillary’s campaign, the Clintons will have been brought down by a sex scandal that did not involve Bill.
-Speaking of irony, how wonderful is it that the same group of politicos who think nothing of leaking anything and everything against their opponents for political advantage are now crying about how unfair it is that someone leaked something against them and claiming it is for political advantage.
–John Podesta now wants full transparency? Bwahahaha
-And doesn’t this suggest that early voting is a really, really bad idea? Imagine you decided you couldn’t vote for Trump, so you voted early for Clinton before today? Wouldn’t it have been better for you to vote when all possible information was available?
(Update: I had to include Saturday’s New York Post Front Page. It is too perfect)