Paul Krugman’s reaction to FBI Director Comey’s letter to Congress today announcing the re-opening of the Clinton email investigation began with outrage and gradually moved to straight up conspiracy theory. Here’s Krugman’s initial reaction calling the letter “Disgraceful.”
It's bad enough having the media do the "raises questions," substance-free innuendo thing. Worse when the FBI director does it. Disgraceful
— Paul Krugman (@paulkrugman) October 28, 2016
Paul Krugman is against raising questions in a substance-free way. We’ll come back to that in a moment. But first, Krugman already has some insight into Comey’s motive:
Comey needs to provide full info immediately. Otherwise he has clearly made a partisan intervention, betraying his office.
— Paul Krugman (@paulkrugman) October 28, 2016
Krugman is saying that, as it stands, Comey’s intent is partisan, i.e. to hurt Hillary Clinton. That’s established. Comey needs to prove himself innocent or else…resign?
— Paul Krugman (@paulkrugman) October 28, 2016
Again, disgraceful https://t.co/MGhOVdSxCS
— Paul Krugman (@paulkrugman) October 28, 2016
Not "almost". https://t.co/LMWC4UNuGn
— Paul Krugman (@paulkrugman) October 28, 2016
Forget Hillary. The guy who every Democrat said was a straight shooter after he declined to recommend charges against Hillary Clinton is now the story:
Note to media: so far this is a story about Comey and his behavior. We know nothing at all about what if anything this has to do with HRC
— Paul Krugman (@paulkrugman) October 28, 2016
And finally Krugman goes full Alex Jones:
Comey probably not trying to elect Trump. But is he trying to help R senators? If he just leaves this hanging, that will be best guess
— Paul Krugman (@paulkrugman) October 28, 2016
Remember how a few tweets earlier Krugman was saying it was “disgraceful” to “do the ‘raises questions,’ substance-free innuendo thing.” It only took 20 minutes to go from that to Krugman asking “But is he trying to help R senators?” And he’s not done issuing fact-free conclusions:
If we don't hear more from Comey, we just have to conclude that he was trying to swing election. And *that* should be the story.
— Paul Krugman (@paulkrugman) October 28, 2016
Journalist Twitter is full of shock at FBI behavior here. That same shock should make it into news reports; not doing so misleads public
— Paul Krugman (@paulkrugman) October 28, 2016
No, Comey needs to realize that he can't be cute. This is the second time he has put a finger on the scales without charges. Not OK. https://t.co/qLjPZqE0dA
— Paul Krugman (@paulkrugman) October 28, 2016
How dare he report that the FBI has reopened an investigation without telling us Hillary will be cleared in advance!
Yet the announcement has done measurable damage to the Clinton campaign — which was predictable. Comey behavior inexcusable. https://t.co/lXvBGgwRJj
— Paul Krugman (@paulkrugman) October 28, 2016
So does it even have anything to do with HRC? Will we even find out before 11/8? But all the public hears is "emails/Clinton/FBI" Grotesque. https://t.co/uxnUDkmNTT
— Paul Krugman (@paulkrugman) October 28, 2016
So this may be a nothing burger — that could swing the election, for the Senate if not the WH. Great work, FBI. https://t.co/9j8AAE96qC
— Paul Krugman (@paulkrugman) October 28, 2016
Here’s an unusual choice of metaphor for talking about a Clinton scandal:
yes. But the bed has been fouled, and can't be un-fouled https://t.co/bQh0ObWidg
— Paul Krugman (@paulkrugman) October 28, 2016
Krugman’s behavior here reminds me of what he did after the Tucson shooting. Without knowing anything he has already decided what happened here and assigned blame. He won’t be alone of course but he is once again spreading an unfounded conspiracy theory about the FBI Director, just as he did about Sarah Palin back in 2011. Unless he has some evidence Comey has a political motivation he shouldn’t be assuming that’s the case.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member