Is this the "October Surprise"?

[s_stabeler]

again, it depends on what the emails actually say. Plus, I didn't say they were definitely faked- just that there was a non-zero possibility they were. But if you posit they were faked by the Republicans to influence the election, trying to get Trump elected, then yes, the effort required would likely be considered worth it.

[mjr]

again, it depends on what the emails actually say. Plus, I didn't say they were definitely faked- just that there was a non-zero possibility they were. But if you posit they were faked by the Republicans to influence the election, trying to get Trump elected, then yes, the effort required would likely be considered worth it.

I'd think there would be a way to figure out if they were faked or not. And I'd assume the FBI would be able to tell.

It's like the Killian Documents Controversy.

So I'm sure if the emails were/are fake (even a few of them), it will come out. As the expression goes, "Sunlight is the best disinfectant".

[Daskinor]

I highly doubt there are 650,000 faked emails.

But all it takes is one fake smoking gun.


Otherwise I doubt the numbers people are reporting are not accurate. Only guesstimates from what limited info they have at this point.

[mjr]

I highly doubt there are 650,000 faked emails.

But all it takes is one fake smoking gun.

Yes, but again, the FBI may have ways to determine whether or not it's fake.

Apparently, to speed up the process they are using some kind of software to go through the 650K emails.

[Gravekeeper]

Frankly, I think the bigger question here is wtf does Comey think he's doing?

[Kheldarson]

Frankly, I think the bigger question here is wtf does Comey think he's doing?

Keeping his job?

[Hanzoku]

Keeping his job?

Not if Hillary wins, he's shown a complete partisan bias in his reporting of investigations and his handling of anything related to Hillary. I'm expecting that he either 'resigns' or is outright fired as soon as she comes into office.

Now, if Trump wins he might be safe, as long as he's 100% OK with ignoring the rule of law and acting as Trump's hatchetman.

[Gravekeeper]

Keeping his job?

How does pissing up a rope at your boss and getting the splatter on the Hatch Act qualify as keeping your job?

His career is over one way or another.

[Kheldarson]

How does pissing up a rope at your boss and getting the splatter on the Hatch Act qualify as keeping your job?

His career is over one way or another.

Not disagreeing, but you asked what he was thinking. He was thinking he was protecting his job by catering to what he sees as the stronger party.

It's a complete chicken-shit move, but there ya go.

[s_stabeler]

The biggest issue is that, frankly, if he did not feel he could serve under Clinton, the response would be to resign if Clinton won, not use his office to attempt to swing the election- especially since it appears to have caused a significant tightening of the race ( at the moment, it will still likely be a Clinton victory, but it is increasingly uncertain.)

[HYHYBT]

I don't really understand why it's affecting the race, if that even is the cause of the polls tightening. After all that's already been out there about her server and emails, why would "oh, hey, here's some more that, if they're not duplicates of what we already knew about, may well have nothing to do with her in the first place" change how people vote?

[Kheldarson]

I don't really understand why it's affecting the race, if that even is the cause of the polls tightening. After all that's already been out there about her server and emails, why would "oh, hey, here's some more that, if they're not duplicates of what we already knew about, may well have nothing to do with her in the first place" change how people vote?

Because they were really looking for an excuse to not vote for her. But Trump had become too unpalatable. So a timely notice of "we may have found her actual deep, dark secrets" is enough to remind folks that we've never found anything that would actually generate the smoke the GOP keeps pointing to, so we have to have found the fire now.

It's so stupid.

[mjr]

Because they were really looking for an excuse to not vote for her. But Trump had become too unpalatable. So a timely notice of "we may have found her actual deep, dark secrets" is enough to remind folks that we've never found anything that would actually generate the smoke the GOP keeps pointing to, so we have to have found the fire now.

It's so stupid.

If there's "nothing there", which Hillary and many of her supporters claim, why would Republicans spend so much time going after her and Bill so vociferously, when there are probably hundreds of other people who they could go after? I can't think an entire party could be THAT scared of one person for that long. It is odd, though, how many people who have "crossed" the Clintons have not fared so well. In fact, I'd say that they have a higher incidence of things "happening" to associates than many, many other Democrats (and Republicans) do.

Anybody who can't see that HRC has made some rather egregious and/or nefarious (and possibly illegal) choices is simply fooling themselves.

[s_stabeler]

to be fair, I think based on FiveThirtyEight's analysis of what the polls mean, that we've actually seen the limit of how much it'll actually affect the polls. It's close enough for it to be nervous, but in the states that will probably decide the election- it's pretty much Nevada, Florida and New Hampshire that will be the swing states in terms of deciding who will get 270 votes in the Electoral College- there is actually a slight increase to Clinton's chances. I'm guessing that a combination of it largely being considered to be non-news and also that Democrats that previously weren't going to bother voting ( because it looked like a dead cert Clinton would win) are deciding to vote, rather than stay home.

as for why it's affecting the race, it's basically because it means the email scandal is fresh in people's memories again, rather than something people don't really remember.

[Kheldarson]

If there's "nothing there", which Hillary and many of her supporters claim, why would Republicans spend so much time going after her and Bill so vociferously, when there are probably hundreds of other people who they could go after?

Because they honestly seem to hate her and her husband? Probably because they are rather successful politicians in ways the RNC collective can only dream?

Anybody who can't see that HRC has made some rather egregious and/or nefarious (and possibly illegal) choices is simply fooling themselves.

No more than most of the RNC. Her crimes are no worse than anything Bush did. And they're still rather tame compared to the risks Trump presents.