James Comey saves Hillary's bacon

Takes the heat off Loretta Lynch and any federal grand jurors in the process.  It was a pretty harsh scolding the FBI director gave the former Secretary of State in his public statement moments ago, but that's all it was.

I don't think the fire has been extinguished, but the bad weather is blowing over.

In chronological order:

#BREAKING: FBI Director Comey says after tremendous amount of work, the FBI has completed investigation and handing off to DOJ for decision

— NBC Charlotte (@wcnc) July 5, 2016

FBI Director Comey: 110 emails in 52 email chains determined to contain classified info, 8 were top secret #7News

— 7News Boston WHDH (@7News) July 5, 2016

FBI Director Comey: Among emails not turned over by Clinton, 3 were classified at the time they were sent or received

— Dave Boucher (@Dave_Boucher1) July 5, 2016

FBI Director Comey says they believe "there was no intentional misconduct," in sorting of emails. https://t.co/RSoxnC72t5

— DJ Judd (@juddzeez) July 5, 2016

FBI director Comey calls Clinton and staff "extremely careless" in handling classified emails.

— Lou Raguse (@LouRaguse) July 5, 2016

FBI Director Comey: No "intentional misconduct" in connection with sorting of Clinton's emails. https://t.co/z9hQnKbdJg

— ABC News Politics (@ABCPolitics) July 5, 2016

FBI director Comey: Clinton "extremely careless" with classified information. "Reasonable person" should have known better.

— Mike Dorning (@MikeDorning) July 5, 2016

FBI Director Comey: It is possible hostile actors gained access to Clinton's email account.

— Mikaela Bufano (@MikaelaBufano) July 5, 2016

BREAKING: FBI Director Comey says "no reasonable prosecutor would bring" a criminal case against Clinton.

— Steven Portnoy (@stevenportnoy) July 5, 2016

FBI director Comey: We are expressing to Justice our view that no charges are appropriate in this case

— Felicia Schwartz (@felschwartz) July 5, 2016

So it was necessary, as referenced here, for there to be malfeasant intent, not just sloppiness or incompetence.  That's the part I got wrong; she didn't mean to, and that's okay.

I suppose there would have had to have been evidence that somebody died as a result of her mishandling of classified information.  But perhaps not even then.  Killing your own credibility and trustworthiness is no crime, after all.

Especially when it was already dead.

Update: It seems the law is quite clear about intent.

Scattershooting President Clinton's first hundred days

-- This, via here, only succeeds in making me nauseous.  They left out 'start a war on Iran' for openers.  At least she might accomplish what Obama has failed to do on Guantanamo.  But she'd negotiate away an unfettered right for a woman to choose if she is left to drink alone with the GOP at White House happy hours.  (Yes, her call to abolish Hyde is a very good move.)

-- No, she won't. Because she understands what would happen if she did.

Texas Republicans, of all groups, are perhaps the most enthused over the idea that the state could be in play in the fall.

Republicans say they would love to see Democrats drawn into what they view as a hopeless money pit. But also, within a state GOP torn over its own nominee, a Clinton offensive could be just what it takes to rally an otherwise morose group.

“The quickest way to activate disenfranchised GOP donors who won’t give to Trump would be an aggressive effort by Democrats to win the state,” said Brian Haley, a Texan who was a top fundraiser in two previous GOP presidential campaigns.

Abbott is one of multiple Republicans who have already sent fundraising emails on the notion.

“She has already made it known that winning Texas will be a focus of her campaign,” Abbott campaign director John Jackson wrote in a recent missive, referring to Clinton. “It’s clear that Hillary will not only continue Obama’s liberal leadership—she will be even worse!”

Stay out of Texas, #HRod.  Democrats here have it bad enough as it is, and they might make up a little bit of ground  (scroll down to Mark Jones' assessment at the end) if you could just, you know, keep using the state as an ATM like always.

-- Some people are really mad about white privilege, brute-force capitalism, and Independence Day.

Call it the land you love, but make sure the drones are loaded, the poisons shipped off in container ships potent, the pestilence of capitalism fully armed with the parasitic power of one global power, my country tis of thee.

I could hammer and hammer the prison industrial complex eating the American Black Male. I could rattle on and on about the United States of Debts, all the trillions homeowners “owe” the financial loan sharks, thugs, or the trillion plus students owe for virtually worthless degrees in this precarious, at-will, dead-end job America.

I could rattle on how insipid and violent forgetting is, and knowing just enough of the foundations of the lies of history to get a young and old person steaming. Imagine, the state of the world with Hollywood, Big Sports, Bubble-head Big Media, Vapid Mainstream Academia weighing in on the vast sucking sound that is America’s presidential-congressional-gubernatorial set of mistakes called elections (sic).

Bombs bursting in air, as I cruised down from a pretty cool spot in the mountains, supposedly away from the ghastly 7-11-Walmart-Texaco-McDonald’s dervish of hyper-stupidity, also called mainstreaming, mainlining consumerism.

I certainly think that any of the morons advocating for #Texit -- even Greg Abbott knows better, for fuck's sake -- should have been compelled to go into the office or the plant for the entire three-day weekend, but this is simply too much hyperbolic exaggeration (two "trillions" is two too many) and way too angry.  Right message but absolutely the wrong messenger.

Dude: drink more America this Labor Day, mkay?

-- None of the above, thanks, but absolutely not Ron Green.

"Battleground bloodbath"

Put down that hotdog and take a look at this.  Via Politico, Ballotpedia's most recent state polling shows Hillary beating Trump ...

• in Florida by 14 percentage points, 51-37
• in Iowa by 4, 45-41
• in Michigan by 17, 50-33
• in North Carolina by 10, 48-38
• in Ohio by 9, 46-37
• in Pennsylvania by 14, 49-35
• and in Virginia by 7, 45-38

Landslide territory -- which is to say that she has no place to go but down from here.  Look at all the states in which she registers 50% or nearly; that tells you they surveyed just two horses in the race.  Hilariously, Ballotpedia also polled John Kasich and Paul Ryan against Clinton, and did include Gary Johnson in a separate three-way (but not Jill Stein).  Here's how that more realistic view of the landscape appears:

• Clinton 47, Trump 34, Johnson 12, neither/refused 7, MOE +/- 4% in Florida
• Clinton 38, Trump 36, Johnson 16, neither/refused 9 in Iowa
• Clinton 47, Trump 30, Johnson 14, neither/refused 9 in Michigan
• Clinton 44, Trump 37, Johnson 10, neither/refused 10 in North Carolina
• Clinton 41, Trump 34, Johnson 15, neither/refused 10, MOE 3.9% in Ohio
• Clinton 46, Trump 32, Johnson 13, neither refused 9, MOE 4% in Pennsylvania
• Clinton 43, Trump 35, Johnson 11, neither/refused 11, MOE 3.9 in Virginia 

Update: If you feel like sanity-checking one state, look at RCP for the Tarheels.  Two late-June polls gave Hillary just a two-point lead there ... and one had Trump ahead by 2.

I've been reading some things that say Johnson pulls votes from Clinton in similar numbers as he does Trump, but Ballotpedia's results here suggest that's not enough to keep her from a very large Electoral College victory in November.  If you're one of those people who likes to parrot that "polls this early don't mean anything", then you might be a junior political consultant or a Trump voter.

As for surveying Kasich and Ryan as the GOP nominee, maybe Ballotpedia should just go ahead and do a Mitt Romney versus Joe Biden head-to-head, no third party candidates.   Because we wouldn't want reality to intrude in any way.

Update II: NPR's magic tool lets you  manipulate data like voter demographics and turnout to predict the winner.  Nutgraf:

"I will win New York against Hillary Clinton," Trump promised at a campaign stop this spring. It's a claim he's fond of reiterating, and since he has articulated a specific desire to win New York, we wanted to see what it would take for him to turn his home state red. Assuming all other demographic groups vote exactly as they did in 2012, and assuming turnout also remains constant, Trump would need to win 97 percent of white men in New York. 97 percent.

Here's your takeaway:

If Clinton somehow loses this election, it would qualify as the most stunning collapse in political history.  And that shame would be all on her.  No more Green excuses, Hillbots.  Look above at how the party and its nominee are still being ignored, after all.

The Weekly Fourth Wrangle

As the Texas Progressive Alliance brings you the Independence Day blog post roundup, we ask you to be cautious about your planned explosions today.

Off the Kuff credits Wendy Davis for getting it right on HB2.

Libby Shaw at Daily Kos is hardly shocked to learn that our state is run by a group of misogynist swine. Will the Texas GOP Apologize for its Unconstitutional Anti-Abortion Bill and its Sexist Piggery?

Socratic Gadfly notes how chunks of the mainstream media tried to create Scalia-connected false drama on the Supreme Court's abortion ruling.

CouldBeTrue of South Texas Chisme warns Texans that a far right group wants to purge Starr County voter rolls so that you don't get a vote.

Neil at All People Have Value supports Ann Harris Bennett for Harris County Tax Assessor/Voter Registrar. She will do a very good job in that important office. APHV is part of NeilAquino.com.

The Lewisville Texan Journal reports on a community loan center as an alternative to the predatory auto title/payday lenders.

John Coby at Bay Area Houston translates Trump's Social Security plan.

Dos Centavos reviews the first Intocable album in three years.

Upon suggesting that Hillary Clinton modify some of her positions to attract Bernie Sanders supporters, Egberto Willies got the predictable response.

And Cheeto Jesus (Donald Trump) begged Saul Relative (PDiddie at Brains and Eggs) for a campaign donation.

==========================

More posts from other great Texas progressive blogs!

Better Texas Blog reminds us that the Zika virus is fast approaching and outlines some preventative measures.

Lawflog takes note of the Texas Commission on Law Enforcement's investigation into the head of the TABC and her husband.

Prairie Weather reads the NYT's review of George W. Bush's forthcoming biography as a scathing indictment.

Steve Bates at Yellow Doggerel Democrat marks today's holiday with a song from the soon-to-be-retired Paul Simon.

The Houston Press peeks behind the scenes at Houston's thirty-year-old Freedom Over Texas, the city's fireworks on the Fourth celebration.

Carol Morgan has a point of view regarding the rendezvous on the Phoenix airport tarmac.

Ashton Woods at Safety in Numbers says, "Pride Houston, we have a problem".

Andrea Ferrigno celebrates the SCOTUS decision striking down HB2.

Keep Austin Wonky criticizes that city's road bond proposal.

The TSTA Blog takes exception to Texas exceptionalism.

The Makeshift Academic explains why Medicaid expansion was such a key component of the Affordable Care Act.

Drew Blackburn wonders why Austin is having such a hard time with regulations on sharing economy companies.

Paradise in Hell looks at the sinkholes of West Texas.

idiotprogrammer tells a tall tale about zombies.

Sunday Independence Funnies

With all apologies to Reg Smythe...

Clinton email investigation in its last throes

After 3.5 hours answering questions posed by FBI investigators, Hillary Clinton has just about finished skating over the thin ice.

Given what we know now, an indictment doesn’t seem likely. As Vox’s Dylan Matthews noted, prosecutors would need evidence not just that Clinton sent classified information outside secure government networks, but that she did so knowing that it was supposed to be classified.

Clinton has denied this, insisting any classified material in the emails was either classified after the fact or she did not realize it had been classified — a position she likely reiterated today to the FBI.

This would contradict my 'murder/manslaughter' post, and doesn't really explain exactly why she'd be in the clear if some of those emails were "born classified".  But hey, they're probably lawyers and know more than I do.

Despite the right wing media's obsession with false accounts regarding the Clinton email server, most credible accounts state the chances of the former Secretary of State facing any legal action or an indictment are miniscule.

Others are saying the same thing.  With the Loretta Lynch/Bill Clinton chat on the Phoenix tarmac earlier this past week, the matter got unnecessarily murkier.  One person has the power to clear it all up.

FBI Director James Comey is now firmly in the driver’s seat of the Hillary Clinton email investigation, after Attorney General Loretta Lynch pledged she would accept whatever course of action his bureau and career prosecutors recommend.

[...]

“Comey is the center of gravity on this thing,” said Ron Hosko, a former FBI assistant director and president of the Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund.

“There is a growing expectation that we the public need to hear the FBI, Jim Comey version of whether or not charges will be brought,” he added. “There has probably been increasing recognition by her that that’s true, that she is viewed as — regardless of her prior reputation as an effective prosecutor — she’s now the head of Obama’s DOJ, a political position in a Democratic administration that is deciding on the prosecution or not of the leading Democratic candidate.”

[...]

The decision (by Lynch to accept the recommendations of investigators) puts the spotlight squarely on Comey, a Republican who is widely respected by GOP lawmakers and known for a streak of independence.

“He is a pro’s pro,” said Matthew Whitaker, a former U.S. attorney and head of the Foundation for Accountability and Civic Trust, a watchdog group. “And I think this takes the pressure off of him that whatever the FBI recommends will be followed, where before I am certain he would be concerned that there will be political interference from the attorney general.”

There’s still a chance that FBI investigators and Justice Department lawyers, who are working on the case together, arrive at different conclusions on how to proceed.

The FBI has a tendency to be more aggressive with cases, whereas prosecutors might be more reluctant to push a charge they are not absolutely certain will stick — especially if the next presidency might be at stake.

“I could easily envision a scenario in which the FBI concludes there is enough evidence to make a case, but the DOJ prosecutors decide that the case is too weak to risk the legal precedent,” Bradley Moss, a lawyer who handles national security and secrecy issues, wrote in an email to The Hill.

“The DOJ career prosecutors are truly the ones who are under the microscope at this point.”

In the federal case against former CIA Director David Petraeus last year, FBI officials reportedly pushed for him to be indicted on felony charges, but then-Attorney General Eric Holder downgraded them to misdemeanors.

Yet Comey is no shrinking violet. If he is ultimately overruled by officials within the Justice Department, that is unlikely to remain a secret.

Potentially incriminating news has “a way of getting out,” said Whitaker.

“I would imagine ultimately we will know how the investigation was conducted or whether there was interference from the political folks at the Department of Justice,” he added.

“But I don’t know whether it will be in time to have an impact in an election year.”

She's almost out of the briar patch.

Green is the New Blue Funnies

The old Blue is just too Red for me.  (And don't call it purple, please.)

This one's for my pal, Erik Vidor...