FBI chief James Comey dropped a bombshell last weekend, not so much by setting afoot a review on Hillary Clinton's e-mails in light of what is touted as 'new but unspecified evidence' as by the timing of it, so close to the election day .
A probe had been concluded by the FBI only in July last year into allegations against Hillary Clinton having used her personal server as secretary of state in her e-mail communications. Director Comey while critiquing her for lack of responsibility in the matter aired the view that it did not warrant prosecution. It seemed to his detractors he had given a legal opinion which they were riled by. With Hillary having admitted her mistake, the matter was considered closed at least for the whole run-up to the election.
Yet clearly with the benefit of hindsight we can say that it was an overoptimistic assessment of things to come. For, some loose ends were left for the Devil's advocates to sneak in for engineering, as it were, a campaign coup. It is perhaps a last-ditch attempt to shore up the consistent trailing behind of Republican nominee Donald Trump as against Hillary Clinton.
The timing of the move broke two protocols, according to independent observers: First is the electoral one that seeks to ensure polls free of influence-mongering or any form of intimidation under a moral pretence; and the second, instance of flouting takes place with some legal norms. The very fact that the review has been timed with what may be perceived as an unabashed ulterior motive to try to alter the outcome of the election makes it suspect and untenable.
The reopening of investigation is assailed on a very cogent ground, it would appear on a closer scrutiny: The e-mails in question came from a device owned by Anthony Weiner, the disgraced congressman with a sex scandal centring around an underaged girl stalking his reputation. It is for the same reason that he has been separated from one of Mrs. Clinton's top aides Huma Abedin since eight years back.
Hundreds and thousands of e-mails are being put under scrutiny so that it will take a whole lot of time to scroll through them in any meaningful way .Thus, the argument of helping the voters make a right choice does not wash. It seems that Trump's incessant complaints about election-rigging by his political opponents have been turned on their heads.
By all accounts, the electorate's mind is made up at this stage. A good 63 per cent say, "FBI review makes no difference in voting for Clinton."
Speaking of scandals, far too many are stacked against Donald than can be put under Hillary column. And none of these so-called twists and turns have been resolved either, which is why they pop up every now and then.
On balance, however, trust and experiential issues are likely to weigh in for Hillary in the ultimate analysis.
Early voting has been substantial, and largely tilted towards Democrats. According to the latest state-by-state-plus-Washington data as on October 31, "Hillary Clinton would win handily with 341 electoral votes to Trump's 197."
Clinton's numbers have dropped marginally in ten states but she still leads in 11 out of 13 battle ground states. UPI's latest statistics suggest, "Donald Trump improves, but Hillary Clinton would win Electoral College.
Party spin doctors, presidential election coverage veterans, congressional leaders, legal experts and campaign managers are working overtime to make a sense of what has happened! Some say the country has plunged into a political maelstrom, others wonder if this is going to be a game-changer but most people would like to see the system of checks and balances ensures the right choice of leaders.
[email protected]
