There is a lot of new reporting about the letter that FBI Director James Comey sent to Members of Congress, notifying them about newly discovered emails that may be pertinent to the FBI's previous investigation into Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server.
Those emails reportedly could number in the thousands and were discovered on a laptop used jointly by former Congressman Anthony Weiner and his wife, Huma Abedin, a top aide to Clinton and were discovered in the course of an unrelated probe into Weiner's sexting.
Comey's language is opaque and cryptic. Comey says that the new emails "appear to be pertinent" to the previous investigation into Clinton's use of a private server. He also says the FBI is now seeking to "determine whether they contain classified information," and "cannot yet assess whether the material may or may not be significant". Comey's own declaration that the new emails "appear to be pertinent" suggests that they are significant. Comey surely knew that news organisations would conclude as much. Perversely, we are being told by news outlets that the new info may not be substantively significant, but it may be politically significant.
Comey's latest justification requires more explanation.
Jane Mayer reports that Justice Department officials are furious, seeing it as a violation of longstanding department protocols, which discourage public comment on ongoing investigations and advise taking care not to influence elections. Others have defended it, arguing that Comey had an obligation to notify Congress about any potentially relevant new findings.