"With each step, Comey moved further away from department guidelines and precedents, culminating in Friday's letter to Congress. This letter not only violated Justice rules on commenting on ongoing investigations but also flew in the face of years of precedent about how to handle sensitive cases as Election Day nears.

"Justice traditionally bends over backward to avoid taking any action that might be seen by the public as influencing an election, often declining to even take private steps that might become public in the 60 days leading up to an election. For an example, in one case of which I am aware, the FBI opened an investigation into a high-ranking public official shortly before an election but delayed sending any subpoenas until after the election for fear that they might leak and unfairly tarnish the official. Indeed, that investigation ultimately concluded with no charges.

"Comey's subordinates have argued through anonymous quotes to reporters that he felt compelled to update Congress because of his previous explanations to them. But that just exposes how ill-advised his earlier statements were. Furthermore, even if he felt compelled to update Congress at some point, he could have followed Justice guidelines and done so after the election.

"Supporters of the FBI director also argue that he would have been criticized had he withheld this information until after the election. But he didn't actually provide Congress or the public with any substantive information. Instead, he provided just enough detail to allow Republicans to make speculative charges about Clinton, but not enough to allow her to defend herself. In fact, in the hours since Comey's letter was released, media outlets have reported often-contradictory details about what the FBI is actually examining, another inevitable result of his actions.

"This entire episode has exposed a troubling character flaw that calls into question Comey's very fitness to lead the FBI. He is without a doubt an outstanding lawyer and public servant. But as he has carefully nurtured his reputation for independence and integrity, he seems to have become intoxicated by the plaudits that have come his way. That praise has emboldened him to ignore the rules that apply to others, both because he believes in his own reputation and because he wants to thwart critics such as Republicans in Congress who might question it."

(Emphasis is mine.)

"It is not clear whether Mr. Comey personally wanted to influence the outcome of the election, although his letter -- which cast suspicion on Mrs. Clinton without revealing specifics -- was concerning.

"Also concerning is the fact that Mr. Comey has already made highly unusual public statements expressing his personal opinion about Mrs. Clinton's actions, calling her handling of classified information 'extremely careless,' when he announced this summer that the F.B.I. was concluding its investigation of her email without filing any charges.

"But an official doesn't need to have a specific intent -- or desire -- to influence an election to be in violation of the Hatch Act or government ethics rules. The rules are violated if it is obvious that the official's actions could influence the election, there is no other good reason for taking those actions, and the official is acting under pressure from persons who obviously do want to influence the election.

"Absent extraordinary circumstances that might justify it, a public communication about a pending F.B.I. investigation involving a candidate for public office that is made on the eve of an election is thus very likely to be a violation of the Hatch Act and a misuse of an official position.

[...]

"This is no trivial matter. We cannot allow F.B.I. or Justice Department officials to unnecessarily publicize pending investigations concerning candidates of either party while an election is underway. That is an abuse of power. Allowing such a precedent to stand will invite more, and even worse, abuses of power in the future."

(Emphasis is mine.)

Yeah, Dems can write letters, too.

Leahy and other Senate Dems already were all over this, as well -- talking about a Leahy committee investigating just how Chaffetz knew to re-endorse Trump the day before Comey's letter to Chaffetz, who leaked the Comey letter to media before it was seen by Dems on his committee.

(And neither Comey nor Chaffetz alerted Clinton's lawyer, a serious discourtesy and possibly worse than that.)

Podesta is trying to kid us.

John Podesta, the chairman of the Clinton campaign, told reporters on a conference call that Abedin had been nothing but cooperative with investigators and sat for hours of depositions last summer as part of the civil lawsuit filed by Judicial Watch

"In their initial review of the laptop, the metadata showed many messages, apparently in the thousands, that were either sent to or from the private email server at Mrs. Clinton's home that had been the focus of so much investigative effort for the FBI. Senior FBI officials decided to let the Weiner investigators proceed with a closer examination of the metadata on the computer, and report back to them.

At a meeting early last week of senior Justice Department and FBI officials, a member of the department's senior national-security staff asked for an update on the Weiner laptop, the people familiar with the matter said. At that point, officials realized that no one had acted to obtain a warrant, these people said.

"I only worry for the country in that Hillary Clinton was careless and negligent in allowing Weiner to have such close proximity to highly classified information. Who knows what he learned and who he told?"