The Biggest Takeaways From Today's House Hearing On Russian Interference In The Election

Here, to us, are the biggest stories from today's House Intelligence Committee hearing on Russian interference on behalf of neo- fascist Putin pocket charm Donald "Rump" Trump in the recent elections. (Nancy LeTourneau has been liveblogging the hearing, and we've relied on her reporting here; check out her insights.)

First, FBI Director and election ratf*cker James Comey confirming right out of the box that there is an active investigation of links between Rump's campaign and the Russian government:

As you know, our practice is not to confirm the existence of ongoing investigations. Especially, those investigations that involve classified matters. But, in unusual circumstances, where it is in the public interest, it may be appropriate to do so, as Justice Department policies recognize. This is one of those circumstances. I have been authorized by the Department of Justice to confirm that the FBI, as part of our counter-intelligence mission, is investigating the Russian government’s efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election. And that includes investigating the nature of any links between individuals associated with the Trump campaign and the Russian government and whether there was any coordination between the campaign and Russia’s efforts.

Furthermore, when Rump shill Rep. Michael Turner (Weasel- OH) attempted to slough off the grounds for initiating an investigation by suggesting any little ol' thing could trigger one, amirite?, Comey responded it would have to be "A credible allegation of wrongdoing." Boom.

Second, Comey asserted that the FBI and Justice Department investigated and have no evidence that President Obama ordered a wiretap of Rump, and that Obama couldn't have ordered one anyway. Boom.

Third, efforts by the Rump White (Supremacist) House to change the narrative are being refuted almost in real time (thanks, Twitter!).

The NSA and FBI tell Congress that Russia did not influence electoral process. pic.twitter.com/d9HqkxYBt5

— President Trump (@POTUS) March 20, 2017

The FBI Director was just asked under oath if this tweet was accurate. He said this tweet is not what he said. https://t.co/RWijNNe90p

— Liam Stack (@liamstack) March 20, 2017

Fourth, as we point out below, not unexpectedly party- before- country Republicans are desperately trying to change the narrative from the leaked information to Rump's focus: "Find the leakers!"  The same pattern occurred during the Watergate hearings, when diehard Nixon supporters in Congress threw every roadblock they could in the way of the investigation -- until those infamous tapes painted them into a corner and forced them to stand down. They're different faces now, but the same empty souls.

Why would anyone with nothing to hide react in the manner Rump is reacting?  Why would elected officials sworn to uphold the Constitution actively engage in dissembling and diversion in order to provide cover for a thing as unfit and unworthy as Rump?  Rhetorical questions, folks!

BONUS:  Be sure to read the statement of Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), which laid out in detail what we already know about the Russia-Trump connection (embedded in the linked article).

Giant Toddler Getting Very Nervous About Adults Finding Out What's In His Closet (UPDATED)

Today, FBI Director and election ratf*cker James Comey will be testifying in an open session to the House Intelligence Committee to address issues related to Russia's involvement in the 2016 election. Comey is expected to also discuss the diversionary charge made by neo- fascist Giant Toddler (h/t Quinn Cummings) Donald "Rump" Trump that President Obama "wiretapped" Trump Tower in New York before and after the election. (See Update below.)

As a prelude to potential bombshells going off, Rump is conducting himself (as always) like a toddler who's desperately afraid his parents will find the dump he made in his closet. Here are his latest attempts to distract and deceive (at 6:35 in this morning!):

James Clapper and others stated that there is no evidence Potus colluded with Russia. This story is FAKE NEWS and everyone knows it!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 20, 2017

The Democrats made up and pushed the Russian story as an excuse for running a terrible campaign. Big advantage in Electoral College & lost!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 20, 2017

The real story that Congress, the FBI and all others should be looking into is the leaking of Classified information. Must find leaker now!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 20, 2017

Being the stupid, obsessive thing that he is, Rump can't help but provide "tells" that make it risibly obvious that he is desperately trying to change the narrative. Which of course makes everyone wonder even more, "What's he hiding?"

We may not be at the beginning of the end of this story, but it's looking like we're approaching the end of the beginning.

UPDATE : Comey has confirmed the FBI is investigating possible connections between Rump associates and Russian government officials.  Also, there's no FBI information on Rump's "wiretapping" diversion. Surprise! More on this later.

UPDATE II:  Where do you think Republicans like House "Intelligence" Committee Chair villain Rep. Devin Nunes (Weasel- CA) get this:

Good Lord. Nunes just asked Comey if FBI would investigate Clinton campaign or foundation for ties with Russia. 

Why from their orange shitgibbon master!

What about all of the contact with the Clinton campaign and the Russians? Also, is it true that the DNC would not let the FBI in to look?

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 20, 2017

Tweets Of The Day - "Alternative Facts" And The Kiss

Press Secretary Sean "Baghdad Sean" Spicer is being "defended" in her own soulless way by Rump advisor Kellyanne "Baghdad Kellyanne" Conway for his bald- face lies yesterday, prompting the hashtag #alternativefacts and a query:

Kellyanne Conway: Sean Spicer gave "alternative facts"@chucktodd: "Alternative facts are not facts. They're falsehoods." pic.twitter.com/QBkoDqoTdp

— Bradd Jaffy (@BraddJaffy) January 22, 2017

Alternative facts totally hold up in court, right? https://t.co/WHOjs8uQQX

— Schooley (@Rschooley) January 22, 2017

And in case you had any doubt about the Rump/ James Comey bromance:

Trump just literally blew a kiss to James Comey at a WH reception for law enforcement pic.twitter.com/HwVq9DNdZd

— Richard Hine (@richardhine) January 22, 2017

"It Was All Politics"

Now that the subpoena to search Anthony Weiner's laptop has been unsealed, the world can see that the FBI - notably the New York office, a.k.a. "Trumpland," - didn't let lack of probable cause stop it from bigfooting in the election on behalf of their Fearless Leader:

The FBI had nothing to justify its election-changing intervention against #Clinton. Zero. Zilch. It was all politicshttps://t.co/9xzY2GNbYt

— EJ Dionne (@EJDionne) December 21, 2016

The FBI's subpoena was "legal garbage."

"It was all politics."  What a shocker.

Comey Over Cartoon of the Day

(click on image to enlarge)

While FBI Director Comey's "letter to Congress" electoral interference may not give many points to sociopath proto-fascist Donald "Rump" Trump, it's problematic for close down ballot races for the Senate and House. The solution? Get out and vote.

(cartoon: Matt Davies, Newsday)

Today's Cartoon Threefer - Comeygate

(click on images to enlarge)


(Tom Toles, Washington Post)


(Steve Benson, Arizona Republic)


(Mike Luckovich, Atlanta Journal-Constitution)

Time For A Deep Breath, Courtesy Of Sam Wang (And Prof. Hubbard)

Polling guru Sam Wang at Princeton Election Consortium has some words of wisdom for us in the wake of Comeygate:

1. The national race will not change meaningfully. Maybe by 1 percentage point when aggregated…2 points max. It doesn’t change the high likelihood of a Clinton win. 

2. Journalists and pundits will continue to feed hysterics by fussing over the Comey story. They may even attempt to use polling evidence to justify their coverage. However, note that national polls had already tightened by 1-2 percentage points, even before Comeygate. This is a phenomenon known as regression to the mean, and is a central assumption of PEC’s model. 

3. Keep your eye on the ball, which is downticket. In the Senate, key races in Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, Nevada, and North Carolina will determine control of that chamber. Small changes mean a lot: early voting, get-out-the-vote, bad weather…maybe even the Comey story.

Wang generally chalks up the static nature of the trend lines to political polarization. Well, we can certainly attest to the fact that Comeygate (had we not already early voted) would have propelled us to the polls in righteous, polarized anger at the events of the last 48 hours.  In fact, just the thought of neo- fascist moron Donald "Rump" Trump gaining any ground from this bungle would be motivation enough to re- double our efforts to see that he's defeated, and we think that goes for tens of millions of Democrats and other sane people.

BONUS:  Professor Hubbard (who has a better record than 538's Nate Silver) has more to soothe the troubled soul.  Caveat:  we need to get out the vote to make this reality; it doesn't happen because someone's calculations said so.

How Banana Republics Do Elections

Here's Digby's perspective on the state of affairs of the 2016 election:

We have outside forces, possibly foreign governments, interfering in the election on behalf of one party with the Wikileaks dumps. We have a candidate of that party declaring his opponent is guilty of crimes and promising to jail her if he wins, suggesting that any other outcome is illegitimate. Now we have the director of the government's most powerful police force ignoring his own bosses and abandoning all norms and precedent to interfere in the election just ten days before it is to take place, benefitting the same party. And we have a media which is ready and willing to run with all of this as it's being fed to them with virtually no concern that they are being used to undermine our democratic processes excusing themselves with the fatuous "it's out there" and "that's our job." 

This is the way banana republics do "elections." That's what we are becoming. Maybe we already are.

In other words, we have vicious, destructive adherents of an alternate reality that are pulling out all the stops to take us down into their hell hole, and others who are perfectly willing not only to go along for the ride, but to grease the wheels.

Sic transit gloria, America.

Those "Damn E-Mails" and "Problematic Men" (UPDATED)

Yesterday's letter from FBI Director James Comey to Congress saying that "the FBI has learned of the existence of e-mails that appear to be pertinent to the investigation" of Secretary Clinton's use of a private e-mail server was an unprecedented move by them just 10 days before the election.  In fact, the e-mails that Comey referred to were those uncovered in an investigation of sleazy, disturbed former Rep. Anthony "Carlos Danger" Weiner for sexting an underage female.  Weiner is the estranged husband of Clinton aide Huma Abedin, who apparently used his laptop to send e-mails as part of her State Department duties. Whether or not classified material was stored or transmitted improperly on that laptop is the focus of the FBI review.

Comey has come under fire from former prosecutors and Justice Department officials for his public disclosure of the new information while an investigation is proceeding, and at the height of an important election. By publicizing the new e-mails without a determination of their relevance or importance to the FBI's previous investigation, the FBI has facilitated Clinton's political and media enemies to engage in speculation and reckless charges before anything is known.  To address yesterday's kerfuffle, Clinton urged the FBI to release "the full and complete facts" of their e-mail review, but Comey's letter indicated that he had no estimate as to when the review would be completed, that last part to the delight of Rethuglicans scrambling to salvage the election.

Last night on "All In With Chris Hayes," New York Magazine writer Rebecca Traister discussed the role that bad behavior by men is having on the first female candidate for President. Whether it's sociopathic groper Donald "Rump" Trump, or misbehaving former President Bill Clinton, or serial adulterers and Rump surrogates Newt "Poot" Gingrich and Rudy "Noun Verb 9-11" Giuliani, or sexting "Carlos Danger" Weiner, the bad conduct of men toward women keeps reverberating through this campaign. Comey's behavior, while not salacious, is at best questionable. As Traister memorably said, "it's like the festival of problematic men."

BONUS:  Erin Gloria Ryan makes the same point, as does T. Becket Adams:

As a woman inches closer to the White House, news is dominated by sexual misconduct of her opponent, her husband and her aide’s husband.

— T. Becket Adams (@BecketAdams) October 28, 2016

UPDATE:  Comey felt the need to clarify his actions in a letter to FBI employees on Friday, which read in part:

Of course, we don’t ordinarily tell Congress about ongoing investigations, but here I feel an obligation to do so given that I testified repeatedly in recent months that our investigation was completed. I also think it would be misleading to the American people were we not to supplement the record.  At the same time, however, given that we don’t know the significance of this newly discovered collection of emails, I don’t want to create a misleading impression.  In trying to strike that balance, in a brief letter and in the middle of an election season, there is significant risk of being misunderstood, but I wanted you to hear directly from me about it. (our emphasis)

"Misunderstood." Ya think, Sherlock?

UPDATE II:  Four Democratic Senators have asked Comey and the Department of Justice for more information about the investigation and emails by October 31, saying that Comey's letter had been misunderstood and was being used for partisan purposes just 10 days before the election.

FBI Director Comey Explodes Two False Narratives, Then Explodes

Today's continuation of the multi- year Hillary Clinton Republican witch hunt, in which FBI Director James Comey was called to testify to a House inquisition committee why, oh why, the FBI didn't recommend burning at the stake charging Ms. Clinton over her handling of State Department e-mails, contained two damaging moments -- er, for the overreaching Republicans (h/t Media Matters).

On "gross negligence" not being an issue here:

... I do not see evidence that is sufficient to establish that Secretary Clinton or those with whom she was corresponding both talked about classified information on email and knew when they did it they were doing something that was against the law. So given that assessment of the facts, my understanding of the law, my conclusion was and remains no reasonable prosecutor would bring this case. No reasonable prosecutor would bring the second case in 100 years focused on gross negligence. And so I know that's been a source of some confusion for folks. That's just the way it is. I know the Department of Justice, I know no reasonable prosecutor would bring this case. I know a lot of my former friends are out there saying where they would. I wonder where they were the last 40 years, because I'd like to see the cases they brought on gross negligence. Nobody would, nobody did.  (our emphasis)

We wonder if that's clear enough, or should Director Comey submit that information in coloring book form for the Republican members.

On the matter of e-mails being marked "classified," contrary to Ms. Clinton's recollection, Comey responds to questioning by Rep. Matt Cartwright (D-PA):

REP. MATT CARTWRIGHT: All right, you were asked about markings on a few documents. I have the manual here, Marking Classified National Security Information, and I don't think you were given a full chance to talk about those three documents with the little c's on them. Were they properly documented? Were they properly marked according to the manual? 

JAMES COMEY: No. 

CARTWRIGHT: According to the manual -- and I ask unanimous consent to enter this into the record, Mr. Chairman -- according to the manual, if you're going to classify something, there has to be a header on the document, right? 

COMEY: Correct. 

CARTWRIGHT: Was there a header on the three documents that we've discussed today that had the little c in the text someplace? 

COMEY: No, there were three emails, the c was in the body, in the text, but there was no header on the email or in the text. 

CARTWRIGHT: So, if Secretary Clinton really were an expert at what's classified and what's not classified, and were following the manual, the absence of a header would tell her immediately that those three documents were not classified. Am I correct in that? 

COMEY: That would be a reasonable inference.  (our emphasis)

So, contrary to some sloppy, ill- informed "reporting" =cough= Mrs. Alan Greenspan =cough=, Ms. Clinton would not have been aware that these e-mails contained classified information since they did not have the proper "classified" header, contrary to national security guidelines.  (Two other e-mails, it turns out, were improperly marked "classified," but hey, no harm no foul amirite?!)

Finally, here's Comey reacting to smarmy insinuations by man- with- a- bad- rug Rep. John "Weaselheaded F*cknugget" Mica (R- FL) that he was in collusion with the White House or other political players before coming to the conclusion not to recommend prosecution:



Now, these Republican assholes plan to pursue a "referral" to the FBI to see if they can find something in Ms. Clinton's Benghazi!!! testimony that they can use to drag this nonsense out until November (and beyond), because they want their neo- fascist demagogue to be elected.  That stain won't go away so easily.

BONUS:  Director Comey also has to answer to questions of abuse of power himself (h/t P.E.C.).

FBI: Not Recommending Clinton Email Charges

Just now:

After Hillary Clinton was interviewed by the FBI for more than three hours Saturday morning, FBI Director James Comey has announced that he is referring the case to the Department of Justice for a decision. However, in what he characterized as an “unusual statement in at least a couple of ways,” Comey concluded that “we are expressing to Justice our view that no charges are appropriate in this case.” 

Comey detailed the ”painstaking undertaking requiring thousands of hours of effort” involved in investigating Clinton’s email servers to see if emails had contained classified material. In 30,000 emails Clinton turned over, 110 emails contained information that was classified at the time, while 2,000 were up-classified. The FBI also recovered further emails, of which three have been determined to have been classified at the time. “We found no evidence that any of the additional work-related emails were intentionally deleted.” 

Comey characterized Clinton and her colleagues as not having intentionally broken any laws but said that they were “extremely careless” in their email practices involving classified information. The FBI found “no direct evidence” that Clinton’s email servers were hacked. 

Prosecutors will make the decision about whether charges are appropriate on handling of classified material, but the FBI’s recommendation is that “no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case.” Looking at past cases, “We cannot find a case that would support bringing charges.”  (our emphasis)

Lots of warranted criticism of the carelessness but, as most rational observers have long predicted, no charges are likely now that the investigation has concluded.  Let's see if we can get through the rest of the campaign without any more unforced Clinton errors.

BONUS:  As recently as 2 days ago, this dead- ender in need of medication was predicting an indictment.  Haha HA!

BONUS II:   Gotta rub it in:

HA Goodman rn pic.twitter.com/V8sWW0JSBU

— daveweigel (@daveweigel) July 5, 2016