What Makes Me ‘Queasy’ is an Election Was Tipped Based on a ‘Matter vs. Investigation’
Please tell me Senator Diane Feinstein was kidding in what she said yesterday morning:
I don't know I'm much less queasy about 'calling it a matter' than that this was used as the pretext to tip the election to Herr Trump
— mike sax (@mikesaxny2) June 11, 2017
Or maybe just humoring this rather silly question about an investigation into Loretta Lynch. I mean for goodness sake, if there was a problem with Lynch wanting to call it a ‘matter’ rather than an ‘investigation’ this is surely the political equivalence of a mild headache that Comey remedied by dragging the country through radical reconstructive surgery.
He made up for the alleged crime of calling it a matter rather than an investigation-something that was never taken up by the press anyway-by calling that press conference that was against all the protocols and precedents of his own agency.
He made up for the very mild queasiness of ‘matter vs. investigation’ by the radical reconstructive surgery of the press conference that went on to swing the election-as Hillary’s numbers took a clear hit in July as Nate Silver documented-and which led to the final piece of radical reconstructive surgery-that October 28 Comey letter. The Comey letter was the difference in the election as Silver also documented.
By the way, for the Republicans-much less Jason Chaffetz of all people-to be outraged over leaks is beyond rich. It was Chaffetz, of course, who leaked the Comey letter on October 28. Of course, Comey knew perfectly well that would happen.
But even to call ‘matter vs investigation’ the equivalence of a mild political headache might be too much. You can make the case that she had a point.
After all what is the real semantical difference between matter vs. investigation? It seems to me it’s that each word conjures up different expectations of whether or not you anticipated that Hillary actually would be indicted at the time.
Nate Silver always warns that as human beings, we’re simply not very good at assessing the probability of various events. One criticism he made to many of us before the election was that it was absurd to give Hillary a 98% chance of winning the election-as in something with as many factors and uncertainty as a Presidential election, you can never get that high.
He had argued that 90% is about as high as it’s realistic to go. He also has cried in the wilderness that there really wasn’t a huge polling error in the election-it was off by about 1.7 percent, which is not large at all by historical standards.
In the end Silver was pretty on the nose with the general election-though he totally missed Trump in the primary. What he had tried to distinguish-but honestly Democrats like me were not interested in hearing-was that HRC was about as likely as Obama to win the popular vote but the EC was more dicey.
In any case, regarding probability, I think you can argue that there was a major overestimation by the media and large segments of the public at the likelihood of Hillary being indicted. The whole Lock Her Up meme was proof of that.
In subsequent hearings before the GOP Congress-the GOP was outraged she wasn’t indicted-Comey testified that it wasn’t a close call for indictment. Based on law and precedent, there simply was no case.
But that’s my complaint: it was always clear that the chances of her being indicted were small. Maybe that’s why Lynch wanted to call it a matter. Maybe the mockery of that was part of the larger false meme that she very likely could be indicted, etc.
Even liberals like Chris Hayes asked her in his interview if she worried about being indicted. This question contained the false premise that her being indicted was a quite probable event-when in truth it was a very remote event.
And Comey then threw more gasoline into the Lock Her Up fire with that totally inappropriate press conference. I also notice that Comey claimed the NY Times piece that said that he based his decision for the presser on fake hacked Russian emails was false.
Color me-very-skeptical of that. Thank goodness, there is an IG investigation into the email probe due out at the end of this year.
Let me ask you this: how would you like for me to ask Comey directly in a pubic hearing what I wrote about in this piece-that the cure of that press conference was much worse than the alleged illness of ‘matter not investigation’ and that there were unrealistic expectations of indictment that Comey himself helped to foment?
If you would like that, then please donate to my campaign. Below is my recent message about that Survey USA poll. However, I got a new one from Gravis coming out this week and this could be a gamechanger-as they promise me this will get a major media release-to ‘thousands of media contacts’ one of those contacts being: Nate Silver.
P.S. As we saw in my poll out last week, the long awaited poll results are in, and right now I’m just 11 points down vs. Peter King (GOP-NY-District 2). And the voters don’t even know who I am yet.
There is nothing more important in getting answers to Trump-Russia collusion than a Democratic House in 2019. Please donate to help me in my part of the effort to fight for a Dem House.
Thank you. We must have a Dem House. And so, we will.