The Gaming Den

SlyJohnny wrote:Well, that's... getting trickier to just assume it was apolitical adherence to protocol. This seems like a poorly conceived plan, though? Or is it just complicated enough the public won't see it as blatantly manipulative as it is?

It was clearly a politically motivated decision to abandon protocol. Protocols he was completely aware of because he was not only reminded of them by the Department of Justice before his letter but he personally invoked those exact same protocols when he refused to have the FBI sign the letter noting that Russian agents were attempting to influence the election.

The best possible reading of Comey's behavior is that he is a dumb fuck who got Jedi mind tricked by Jason Chaffetz. The only other possibility is that he took actions that were deliberate and criminal in an attempt to get political allies elected and damage the legacy of the president he serves.

But either way he's going to get a golden parachute of high paid gigs at right wing think tanks and commentariat spots on Fox News for the rest of his life. He might go to jail, but if so he'll still get those sweet wingnut wellfare checks as soon as he gets out (see: Oliver North).

-Username17

It's always entertaining to watch partisans find ways to believe that any official action with consequences detrimental to their party must be invalid, illegal, and/or corrupt.

It doesn't seem to matter much which 'side' they're on. Or what their particular affiliation is.

Occluded Sun wrote:It's always entertaining to watch partisans find ways to believe that any official action with consequences detrimental to their party must be invalid, illegal, and/or corrupt.

It doesn't seem to matter much which 'side' they're on. Or what their particular affiliation is.

I like how you didn't say that on friday or saturday, when someone could have reasonably believed that, but you waited until after it came out that

1) Comey has no evidence that the emails are related to Clinton in any way.
2) Comey colluded with the Republican chair head.
3) Comey tried to suppress information about an investigation into Trump because it was too close to the election and it would be wrong to influence the election.
4) Comey specifically came out in a statement saying that part of the reason he did it was because with the election so close, the people had a right to know.

so that anyone with even a hint of brains can figure this out.

Yeah, Comey refused to sign the FBI's name onto the report stating that Russian agents were attempting to interfere with the election - despite reaching the conclusion that that was the case - on the basis that it would influence the election. There is no way to square that with his latest actions, in which the FBI has zero conclusions (because they had not yet looked at a single fucking email) and yet Comey commented and influenced the election. Selectively applying the principles and responsibilities of your office in a way that favors one candidate over another is blatantly corrupt. It also happens to be illegal, though AFAIK the only possible penalty is firing.

There are plenty of things Comey could say that would hurt Trump, and he has either not said them or deliberately refused to say them given ample opportunity - but he was so eager to take a shot at Hillary Clinton he didn't even wait to see what he had. That is a blatant double standard.

In addition to being fired, it is possible to be fined a small amount for Hatch Act violations (capped at a measly $1000). The case for Comey's actions as a Hatch Act violation is a bit tricky - since his actions are part of his official duties it's necessary to prove intent to influence the election. That's rather more difficult than establishing that the IT specialist was hanging up Bush/Cheney posters in the copy room, which is the kind of thing that the Hatch Act is used to prosecute most of the time.

However, since FBI Director is a Presidentially appointed position, Obama could sack Comey pretty much at any time. I'd expect that to happen after the election, regardless of who wins, though Comey will probably be strongly pressured to resign first.

Intent to influence the election is proved by his own statements, no matter how much he tried to pretty them up. Intent to influence the election in favor of a specific candidate is pretty obvious from the highly selective application of his bullshit "the public deserves to know" standard.

I don't even know how to parse the FBI twitter craziness, but I think it's safe to say at this point that Comey's FBI has gone rogue.

If you say that the people have a right to know something before an election, you are saying that you want to influence that election. Thus, Comey has with his own words said exactly that he intended to influence the election and thus that he broke the Hatch act. It's actually extremely cut and dried. We can speculate on his motives, but whether he broke the law and long established policies of the bureau is not in doubt.

The three top potential motives are:

• Comey allowed himself to be intimidated by Republican members of congress and broke policy because Jason Chaffetz demanded that he do so.
• Comey has completely lost control of the New York office of the FBI and learned that they wre going to write a letter to congress or the media or both if he didn't do it first.
• Comey is throwing a temper tantrum and doing his best to influence the election however he can.

In any case it boils down to Comey being either unable or unwilling to do his fucking job.

As for the weird ass twitter explosion, the giant pile of nothing relates to pardons issued by the president for alleged crimes that Comey was investigating in the early 90s. So either this is Comey continuing to lose his fucking mind and flagrantly violate protocol, decorum, and the law because he hates the Clintons so very much, or it's someone in the Bureau with access to the twitter feed trying very hard to make it look like Comey has completely lost his shit. At this point, I don't even care which it is. Comey needs to go, and the only open question is whether the entire FBI needs to be disbanded and replaced with a new investigative organization that lacks Hooverian institutional inertia.

-Username17.

https://inews.co.uk/essentials/culture/ ... enborough/

Ancient History wrote:https://inews.co.uk/essentials/culture/ ... enborough/

Publically advocating assassination. Lovely.

It was a joke, and he's British. Not the same as, let us say, Donald Trump hinting at assassinating the opposition. Which he did.

I miss the days when the craziest republican in an election was a philandering pizza shop owner.

Anywhom, we've been doing early voting here in the Hub. I tried to do it today, and the line for it was THREE FUCKING BLOCKS LONG. So fuck no to that. But apparently, close to a million people have done it already, which I guess means lots of people like standing in long ass lines.

Have they been doing early voting elsewhere?

I don't. I think Trump perfectly captures the Republican Party's spirit.

Oh, one thing I meant to post about the election a week or two ago (but I forgot) is that this year in Indiana they just passed a rule for voting that straight ticket votes won't be counted for positions where there is more than 1 candidate for a party, like in smaller city council posts. I figure they did that to mitigate down-ballot damage by Trump.

I've only heard about it once on the radio, so odds are a lot of people are going to not have their votes counted on smaller election posts.

erik wrote:Oh, one thing I meant to post about the election a week or two ago (but I forgot) is that this year in Indiana they just passed a rule for voting that straight ticket votes won't be counted for positions where there is more than 1 candidate for a party, like in smaller city council posts. I figure they did that to mitigate down-ballot damage by Trump.

I've only heard about it once on the radio, so odds are a lot of people are going to not have their votes counted on smaller election posts.

They actually did tell me this when I voted early, so maybe word will get around.

[url=https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/258640349872926720 wrote:actual Trump tweet[/url]]"Robert Pattinson should not take back Kristen Stewart. She cheated on him like a dog & will do it again--just watch. He can do much better!"

what. I'd thought a friend came up with a clever js injection trick.

Longes wrote:

Ancient History wrote:https://inews.co.uk/essentials/culture/ ... enborough/

Publically advocating assassination. Lovely.

If elderly Brits want to shoot you, they don't joke about it, they just do it. If Hot Fuzz and dozens of spy movies have taught me nothing else, it's that.

Oh geeze, 538's giving 66-33 odds for Clinton and Trump, respectively. That's way too damn close for my taste. There needs to be another debate or some kind of anti-Comey by Monday.

Ancient History wrote:https://inews.co.uk/essentials/culture/ ... enborough/

They could have matched the font.

Shatner wrote:Oh geeze, 538's giving 66-33 odds for Clinton and Trump, respectively. That's way too damn close for my taste. There needs to be another debate or some kind of anti-Comey by Monday.

Yeah, about five light blue states have flipped. I keep wondering if the Clinton camp is sitting on something else.

Well, when the FBI declares that Trump will be the next President come hell or high water, it sways things a bit.

I love how after the totally new totally Hillary related emails that are totally related to Hillary without being to or from her and that haven't been read didn't do anything to end Clinton's Presidency, then the FBI released online for anyone to look at an investigation into Bill Clinton pardoning someone because "if anyone ever FOI's the same thing three times, the FBI immediately puts it online for anyone to see" according to the FBI. Which is weird, because apparently this Bill Clinton pardon investigation is the first thing that has ever been FOI requested three times ever.

And then of course, two days later, The FBI LEAKED TOTALLY LEAKED, WHO COULD HAVE POSSIBLY DONE THIS! To Fox news from two whole sources, that actually, for months now, they've been heavily investigating the Clinton foundation for Fraud, and it's super important, and just any day now they are going to indict Hillary Clinton. Not today of course, but just, any day now. Really REALLY SOON. WE PROMISE.

RobbyPants wrote:Yeah, about five light blue states have flipped. I keep wondering if the Clinton camp is sitting on something else.

Clearly not, because they would have dumped it by now - but I guarantee there are people scrambling to find something juicy enough to change headlines.

Clinton is still leading semi-comfortably in exactly the bare minimum states she needs to win, and has a couple bonus state coinflips on top of that. Not a terrible position to be in. Early voting started before the FBI declared themselves Trump4lyfe, so I'm sure that helps. But yes, a nail-biting 272-268 electoral college split is... very likely. It might actually be one of the single most likely outcomes, not that that's saying much, because there are a fuckton of different possible outcomes.

Kaelik wrote:And then of course, two days later, The FBI LEAKED TOTALLY LEAKED, WHO COULD HAVE POSSIBLY DONE THIS! To Fox news from two whole sources, that actually, for months now, they've been heavily investigating the Clinton foundation for Fraud, and it's super important, and just any day now they are going to indict Hillary Clinton.

An investigation which seems to be based on a debunked book by Peter Schweizer, a professional Clinton-baiter in the pay of... Stephen Bannon, chief executive of the Trump campaign. What the actual fuck?

Yeah, it looks like James Comey surrounded himself with a bunch of like-minded right-wingers, and now the FBI is tearing itself apart over his refusal to indict Hillary Clinton based on right-wing conspiracy theories. So you have a faction of the FBI that wants Trump to win and is willing to fudge the rules to make that happen (lead by Comey), and a faction of the FBI that wants Trump to win and is furiously pushing for a police coup (lead by whoever is responsible for the latest wave of leaks). And both factions have five days to run wildly out of control doing as much damage as they possibly can.

The states to look at are:
Colorado
Pennsylvania
Michigan
New Hampshire
Wisconsin
Virginia

In the worst case scenario that Hillary Clinton is driven back to depending on the "firewall" the media keeps talking about, those are the six states in the firewall that could plausibly crack. Polling-wise, Wisconsin and Michigan have not been particularly close at any other point in the race - even Clinton's lowest. Colorado, Pennsylvania, and Virginia have been, but still favored Clinton. Donald Trump was ahead in New Hampshire at one point, so thats a thing. How much the race tightens at this point is ultimately up to the media and how they choose to cover the FBI's one-sided leaks. So probably down to the wire.

A 65/35 odds are still pretty good, and under normal circumstances, Clinton supporters would be feeling pretty good. The only reason there's as much consternation is because of how one-sided things looked two weeks ago.

I think Five Thirty Eight has done a good job trying to show that Trump wasn't down to 1% chance to win (like some places) and the lowest his odds went were close to 15%. But I think there are a lot of reasons for the race to look closer than it probably is in this final stretch.

It's going to come out to turnout. If the Clinton camp does a good job of turning out their voters, it won't look close in the electoral college.

But I can't wait for it to be truly over.