Andrea Mitchell's palpable disappointment at not getting the chance to report Hillary Clinton's indictment was a shameful performance on MSNBC. Fortunately, her guest took the wind right out of her sails and put responsibility on Comey for making one of the most nakedly political statements about closing an investigation I have ever seen anywhere.

Mrs. Greenspan began by asking Matt Miller, ex-spokesman for the Department of Justice how he could "justify the fact that she was this careless with her emails?"

Oh, the vapors. You could almost see them on the screen.

Miller shot back, "For Jim Comey to come out and make that kind of public statement about someone whom the government is not going to charge is completely inappropriate and arguably violates DOJ and FBI rules."

Mrs. Greenspan was having none of it, so she dragged out Paul Ryan's statement where he did everything but call Clinton Satan.

Miller had a comeback for that, too, and it was not kind to Director Comey.

"I think that type of statement is why the FBI director is not supposed to hold press conferences like the one he held today. If you're not going to bring charges you shouldn't insert yourself in the middle of a political campaign the way he did," Miller asserted.

He went on to repeat, "If there is to be a judgment that her behavior was careless or inappropriate, that's a judgment for the State Department and Inspector General to make. The FBI's job is to determine whether laws were violated and charges can be brought in court. His determination was that there were no laws violated and he wouldn't recommend charges."

"Beyond that, it's really inappropriate for him to be talking about this case any further."

Mitchell then pivoted to a question of transparency. We see what you did there, Mrs. Greenspan. If you can't convict her in a court of cable television, let's go for the "transparency" look.

"Isn't transparency important?," she cried. "Why shouldn't the American people know what they did, what they found, what was wrong, what was careless, what, as he points out, did not rise to the level of a criminal prosecution? They're going to be voting on someone for President of the United States!"

Yes, fergawdsakes, they're going to be voting for someone for President! They have two choices: a fascist or someone who dared to use a personal email server to get stuff done! Heaven forbid!

In a measured tone, Miller patiently answered. "People should know that and there are procedures in place so they can. The State Department Inspector General, for example, has been reviewing this matter, has been reviewing her use of email, but that's not what the FBI exists to do. The FBI exists to bring charges or not...Hillary Clinton certainly shouldn't get any special treatment but she shouldn't get any worse treatment than any other person would get either. "

He continued, "And I can't remember a time in history when the FBI director or when an Attorney General has reviewed a case, decided that the evidence does not support bringing charges, and still make really reckless statements about an underlying individual's behavior. It's really just not appropriate unless he's ready to back them up in court which obviously as he said today he doesn't believe is appropriate."

Someone please call me when Mrs. Greenspan gives half as much of a damn about other Secretaries of State and government officials using private servers hosted by the Republican-damn-National-Committee, okay?