Last Friday, the FBI announced it was reopening its criminal investigation into matters relating to Hillary Clinton’s emails. Mrs. Clinton’s reaction? During a news conference in Iowa Friday evening, she told reporters, “We’ve heard these rumors, we don’t know what to believe. … And I’m sure there will be even more rumors. That’s why it is incumbent upon the FBI to tell us what they’re talking about.”
“Good diversion, Hillary,” writes Francis Menton in the Manhattan Contrarian.
But the problem is, we know that the FBI is duty-bound not to disclose what it knows in an ongoing investigation. So, your demand was fake. On the other hand, there is someone who works for you and who knows what is on Huma’s computer, and on Anthony’s, and who is not subject to the FBI’s duty to keep its ongoing investigations confidential. That person is — Huma! So, Hillary, when will we see you publicly instructing Huma to tell us everything she knows about what is on her or Anthony’s computers? I’m not holding my breath waiting for this.
Hillary’s campaign has been arguing that doubting the election’s outcome was undermining democracy. Now Hillary is suggesting that FBI Director James Comey is launching a partisan witch-hunt against her. Instead of acting like “a paranoid, chronically deceptive politician who has something to hide,” suggests Peter Spiliakos in NRO, Hillary “could have leveraged public trust in the FBI to her advantage and downplayed the news.”
She could have said that she had no doubt that the FBI would do a thorough and competent job, and find nothing of any interest — and now let the FBI do its job while we talk about good jobs, affordable education, secure retirements, and the rest.