On Friday major 'news' hit the television and the Internet alike as countless news sources announced that the FBI was reopening the investigation into Hillary Clinton's emails. However, a day later and numerous other sources are counter-claiming against that. For example, Robert Sobel wrote that "Despite initial reports, the FBI is not re-opening their case into Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server" in an October 28th article.

At this point, many might feel as though it's difficult to know what news source to consult. But I think that in the big picture, the whole investigation thing is just a massive red herring. One question that may have been evaded over the last 24 hours is what would it mean even if the investigation was reopened?

#Donald Trump, believing that the investigation had been reopened, stated "this changes everything" triumphantly. If you read into that statement you see a tacit acknowledgement that before Friday he saw himself as the loser in the upcoming election. Perhaps he got duped along with millions of others in a strange twist of political developments that will leave millions unsure about what news source to trust.

Proving Clinton crooked wouldn't create Republicans

However, when Trump offered his opinion that "everything" was different it made me wonder. Even if Clinton was to be subject to an investigation now, is there any scenario where her name is not on the ballot? If so then is there any scenario where another democratic nomination is not there? Those questions are very relevant to the man who thinks that "everything" changed on October 28th.

Would Latinos all of a sudden jump on Trump's side after all he has said about them? Even if Clinton was found to be crooked, I don't think Latinos wouldn't throw all of Trump's affronts into the memory hole. Furthermore, there is the question of the women's vote as well (you know - the vote from half of the USA's population).

Would American women that were disgusted with Trump's locker room talk vote for him if Clinton was being investigated? Here's a man who has numerous allegations against him involving sexual misconduct. While allegations aren't solid evidence I can still see how women, and men who respect women, would have a nerve touched by all the allegations. What would an investigation into Clinton change for them? 

Then there is the matter of ideologues. Would die-hard Democrats shift their support? What about those that are social democrats who preferred Bernie Sanders? How about the far left that prefer the politics of Noam Chomsky and/or George Orwell?

If you think any significant percentage of those people vote for Trump over a currently inconclusive and possibly-fictitious investigation then you don't know what people think about when they vote. It's not just the individual's history, but his/her stance on things like welfare, taxation, and many other issues that come into play as well. Just as allegations of sexual misconduct against Trump aren't changing the viewpoints of many who are right-winged, allegations against Clinton won't change the position of those that are between the far left and the centre.

Fact or fiction, reopened investigation irrelevant

When Trump announced that the alleged reopening of the investigation changed "everything" I think it was a vast overstatement - even before doubts were cast on the reports. Certainly, Clinton would be hurt, but her getting investigated doesn't change a leftist, a centrist, a feminist, or a Clinton-supporting Latino into a Republican. I see Trump as so desperate here that he had to grasp at whatever he could, including the logician's nightmare known as the red herring, and try to use that to create a mirage of momentum as election day nears. #2016 Election #HillaryClinton