The latest chapter of America's long national emails-related nightmare entered its third day today, a day filled with revelations about the investigation itself and revelations that everyone is mad at both James Comey and Anthony Weiner.

The Washington Post reported today that investigators at the FBI had known about the existence of the emails on Weiner's laptop "for weeks," but hadn't told James Comey about them until Thursday afternoon. No one knows what exactly investigators were doing with this knowledge. Yahoo also reported that at least as late as Saturday night, the FBI still hadn't actually read any of the emails on Weiner's computer because they didn't have a warrant that would allow them to. And just like on Saturday, we got another good New York Post cover:

Four Senate Democrats, including two on the Judiciary Committee, sent James Comey a letter asking that he reveal everything he knows about the emails by Monday. However, the letter doesn't disclose any potential consequences for the FBI director other than everyone continuing to be really mad at him if he doesn't follow their directions. Comey is also under fire from former Justice Department officials. One former federal prosecutor, Solomon Wisenberg, told the Huffington Post that all of this stems from what he said was Comey's original mistake of holding a press conference to share the original server investigation's findings and then testifying he would reopen it if new information came to light.

"His duty was to shut up and he didn’t. If you want to talk about violating protocol, he has provided a roadmap" Wisenberg said.

Fox News's Jeanine Pirro blasted Comey's new letter as well, and said that the decision was "symptomatic of all that is wrong in Washington."

Richard Painter, the chief White House ethics lawyer from 2005 to 2007, used a New York Times editorial to accuse James Comey of violating the Hatch Act, which "bars the use of an official position to influence an election." Not one to let his words do all the talking for him, Painter also announced in the editorial that he had filed a complaint with the Office of Special Counsel and the Office of Government Ethics regarding the potential violation.

As for Anthony Weiner, his silence has not kept people from talking about how much they hate him. The New York Times published a hilarious article that read like an Anthony Weiner slam book, allowing people like Al Sharpton, Randi Weingarten, Bradley Tusk and Democratic donors and strategists to describe him as "a recurring nightmare," "a sexual predator," "too glib and too full of himself," and a "narcissist who was massively flawed."

Of course, no one is actually sure what effect, if any, this will actually have on the election. Donald Trump, seizing a rare triumphant moment, told audience members at a Colorado rally that he was right to call Anthony Weiner a sleaze. He also said, with no evidence, that "the evidence as I would imagine is so overwhelming because they wouldn’t have done this if it wasn’t overwhelming" and compared Clinton's use of her private email server to Watergate. That drew a Twitter rebuke Carl Bernstein, Mr. Watergate himself:

There'a also at least one poll that showed the new investigation into emails that have possibly already been investigated would have virtually no effect on voters in battleground states and would possibly even make some people more likely to vote for Hillary Clinton:

Gotta love those emails.