http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/30/us/politics/comey-clinton-email-justice.html
The day before the F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, sent a letter to Congress announcing that new evidence had been discovered that may be related to the completed Hillary Clinton email investigation, the Justice Department strongly discouraged the step and told him that he would be breaking with longstanding policy, three law enforcement officials said on Saturday.
Senior Justice Department officials did not move to stop him from sending the letter, officials said, but they did everything short of it, pointing to policies against talking about current criminal investigations or being seen as meddling in elections.
That Mr. Comey moved ahead despite those protestations underscores the unusual nature of Friday’s revelations, which added a dramatic twist to the final days of a presidential campaign. His action also reignited a firestorm that Mrs. Clinton believed she had put behind her when the F.B.I. decided in July not to charge anyone in the investigation into the handling of classified information on her private email server. Mr. Comey’s letter did not reopen that inquiry.
Senior Justice Department officials, career prosecutors and even some in the F.B.I. were at a loss Saturday as to what would happen next. Would Mr. Comey provide a blow-by-blow accounting of the F.B.I.’s steps until Election Day? Did he plan further announcements? Or did he intend, after shaking up the election with his letter, to remain silent about the facts until the presidential votes had been tallied? The F.B.I. offered no comment, and Justice Department officials said they had no idea what Mr. Comey saw as his next move.
The letter to Congress — which followed the discovery of a new trove of emails in an investigation into the disgraced former congressman Anthony D. Weiner — opened Mr. Comey up to fierce criticism not only from Democrats but also from current and former officials at the F.B.I. and the Justice Department, including Republicans.
“There’s a longstanding policy of not doing anything that could influence an election,” said George J. Terwilliger III, a deputy attorney general under President George Bush. “Those guidelines exist for a reason. Sometimes, that makes for hard decisions. But bypassing them has consequences.”
He added, “There’s a difference between being independent and flying solo.”