FBI Clears Hillary Clinton (Again), but the Damage Is Done

FBI Clears Hillary Clinton (Again), but the Damage Is Done

FBI Clears Hillary Clinton (Again), but the Damage Is Done

James Comey just gave one of the most consequential “oh, neverminds” in American history. 

Facebook
Twitter
Email
Flipboard
Pocket

On Sunday afternoon, FBI Director James Comey sent a letter to Congress stating that the e-mails recovered on Anthony Weiner’s laptop “have not changed our conclusion that we expressed in July with respect to Secretary Clinton.”

That conclusion was Clinton had not broken any laws, and that remains true today. Normally, this would be good news for Hillary Clinton—but Comey’s initial pronouncement nine days ago, that agents were once again examining Clinton’s conduct, turned the presidential race on its head. And it’s almost certainly too late to reverse some of the damage, just 40 hours from the start of nationwide voting on Tuesday.

NBC’s Pete Williams has reported most of the e-mails on Weiner’s laptop, presumably from the inbox of his wife, Huma Abedin, a top Clinton adviser, were duplicates of e-mails the FBI already reviewed.

This raises the question of why Comey didn’t wait until the FBI actually reviewed the e-mails in question before making an explosive public pronouncement in the final, pregnant weeks of a heated presidential campaign.

In the nine days between Comey’s first announcement and Sunday’s “nevermind,” Donald Trump blanketed the airwaves with ads like this, claiming Clinton was “under FBI investigation again” for e-mails found “on pervert Anthony Weiner’s computer.”

Perhaps those sledgehammer ads only riled up Trump’s base, but overall the scandal had a demonstrable effect on Democratic enthusiasm. Several top Democratic pollsters who spoke with The Washington Post’s Greg Sargent this week told him the poll numbers turned “grisly,” that Comey’s initial letter “limits the scope of [Clinton’s] win,” and that the episode may have cost Democrats some down-ballot races. Millennials, in particular, were turned off of Clinton and the political process in general.

This is why there is normally huge deference from law enforcement about public information that could affect elections. Small flashes of information that ultimately mean nothing can alter the course of elections, and then alter history beyond that—if a Republican Senate keeps the Supreme Court to eight justices (or less) for the next four years, we may think of this extraordinary intervention by Comey.

Top Department of Justice officials warned Comey not to make this disclosure, and many former officials and agents blasted his choice. This is why.

Comey’s announcement on Sunday, while no doubt welcomed by Clinton’s campaign, only throws the issue back in front of voters again. And it allows Republicans to once again paint Comey as feckless or in Obama’s pocket or both—they took a brief vacation from this line of criticism over the past week and a half, but they’re back at it. As of this writing, Donald Trump has not commented on the development, but we can guess what he’ll say—the system is still rigged. His crowds will no doubt love it.

Late Sunday, Republican Senator Roy Blunt declared, “This was rushed work, which the FBI has clearly botched.” Blunt is at least half-right. 

 

Thank you for reading The Nation!

We hope you enjoyed the story you just read. It’s just one of many examples of incisive, deeply-reported journalism we publish—journalism that shifts the needle on important issues, uncovers malfeasance and corruption, and uplifts voices and perspectives that often go unheard in mainstream media. For nearly 160 years, The Nation has spoken truth to power and shone a light on issues that would otherwise be swept under the rug.

In a critical election year as well as a time of media austerity, independent journalism needs your continued support. The best way to do this is with a recurring donation. This month, we are asking readers like you who value truth and democracy to step up and support The Nation with a monthly contribution. We call these monthly donors Sustainers, a small but mighty group of supporters who ensure our team of writers, editors, and fact-checkers have the resources they need to report on breaking news, investigative feature stories that often take weeks or months to report, and much more.

There’s a lot to talk about in the coming months, from the presidential election and Supreme Court battles to the fight for bodily autonomy. We’ll cover all these issues and more, but this is only made possible with support from sustaining donors. Donate today—any amount you can spare each month is appreciated, even just the price of a cup of coffee.

The Nation does not bow to the interests of a corporate owner or advertisers—we answer only to readers like you who make our work possible. Set up a recurring donation today and ensure we can continue to hold the powerful accountable.

Thank you for your generosity.

Ad Policy
x