U.S. FBI Recommends No Criminal Charges in Hillary Clinton Personal E-mail Server Investigation

Aug 5, 2016

Speaking at a National Association of Black Journalists (NABJ) and National Association of Hispanic Journalists (NAHJ) joint convention in Washington, D.C., Hillary Clinton was questioned about her private e-mail server controversy.

Journalist Kirsten Welker of NBC News asked Clinton the following:

Madam Secretary, your poll numbers went way up this week, and yet, the e-mail controversy was still in the headlines. So I want to give you the opportunity to respond. This week, you told two separate news organizations that FBI director James Comey said, quote, my answers were truthful and that what I said is consistent with what I have told the American people.

That assertion, as you know, has been debunked by multiple news organizations which point out that Director Comey did say there's no indication that you lied but to the FBI, but he didn't weigh in on whether or not you were truthful to the American people. So my question for you is, are you mischaracterizing Director Comey's testimony, and is this not undercutting your efforts to rebuild trust with the American people?

Clinton responded by saying:

...what I told the FBI, which he [FBI director James Comey] said was truthful, is consistent with what I have said publicly. So I may have short circuited it, and for that, I, you know, will try to clarify...

Now, I have acknowledged repeatedly that using two e-mail accounts was a mistake and I take responsibility for that. But I do think, you know, having him say that my answers to the FBI were truthful and then I should quickly add, what I said was consistent with what I had said publicly.

And in questioning, Director Comey made the point that the three e-mails out of the 30,000 did not have the appropriate markings. And it was therefore reasonable to conclude that anyone, including myself, would have not suspected that they were classified. And in fact, I think that has been discussed by others who have said two out of those three were later explained by the State Department not to have been in any way confidential at the time that they were delivered.

So, that leaves the 100 out of 30,000 e-mails that Director Comey testified contained classified information, but again, he acknowledged there were no markings on those 100 e-mails. And so, what we have here is pretty much what I have been saying throughout this whole year and that is that I never sent or received anything that was marked classified.

But, Director Comey said there was absolutely no intention on my part to either ignore or in any way dismiss the importance of those documents because they weren't marked classified.

Source:

Schwartz, Ian. (August 5, 2016). "Hillary Clinton: 'I May Have Short-Circuited' on 'Truthful' Server Answer". Real Clear Politics. Retrieved 2016-08-07.

Jul 12, 2016

U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch testified before the U.S. Congress. In sharp contrast to last week's testimony from FBI Director James B. Comey, Lynch refused to discuss details of the investigation and often referred back to the findings of the FBI.

Jul 11, 2016

U.S. Director of National Intelligence James Clapper denied Paul Ryan's request to block Hillary Clinton from receiving classified intelligence briefings during her campaign.

Jul 7, 2016

FBI Director James B. Comey testified before the U.S. Congress.

The U.S. State Department reopened it's internal investigation into Clinton's use of a personal e-mail server. The State Department halted it's investigation in April to allow the FBI to conduct it's own investigation.

U.S. Speaker of the House of Representatives Paul Ryan sent a letter (dated yesterday) to the U.S. Director of National Intelligence James Clapper asking that Clinton be denied access to classified intelligence and security briefings during her campaign.

Jul 6, 2016

U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch announced she has accepted the recommendations of the FBI and that Clinton will not face criminal charges.

Paul Ryan said Clinton should be denied access to classified information during the general election campaign.

Jul 5, 2016

In a statement to the press, FBI Director James B. Comey announced that no criminal charges are being recommended in the Hillary Clinton personal e-mail server investigation. Now, it's up to U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch and the U.S. Department of Justice to make a decision on whether any charges should be filed against Clinton. Last Friday, Lynch said she would accept the decision of the FBI recommendations and "career prosecutors".

In his statement, Comey explained what the FBI did, what the FBI found, and what the FBI recommends to the U.S. Department of Justice.

Comey said the FBI looked for evidence that classified information was mishandled "intentionally or in a grossly negligent way" (a felony), or if classified information was "knowingly" removed from any storage system (a misdemeanor). He also said the FBI looked for evidence that Clinton's e-mail server was intruded (hacked).

Comey said the FBI read "all of the approximately 30,000 e-mails provided by Secretary Clinton to the State Department in December 2014". Regarding those e-mails he said:

From the group of 30,000 e-mails returned to the State Department, 110 e-mails in 52 e-mail chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received. Eight of those chains contained information that was Top Secret at the time they were sent; 36 chains contained Secret information at the time; and eight contained Confidential information, which is the lowest level of classification. Separate from those, about 2,000 additional e-mails were "up-classified" to make them Confidential; the information in those had not been classified at the time the e-mails were sent.

Comey said the FBI found additional work-related e-mails. Regarding those e-mails he said:

With respect to the thousands of e-mails we found that were not among those produced to State, agencies have concluded that three of those were classified at the time they were sent or received, one at the Secret level and two at the Confidential level. There were no additional Top Secret e-mails found. Finally, none of those we found have since been "up-classified."

I should add here that we found no evidence that any of the additional work-related e-mails were intentionally deleted in an effort to conceal them.

Comey went on to say:

Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.

Separately, it is important to say something about the marking of classified information. Only a very small number of the e-mails containing classified information bore markings indicating the presence of classified information. But even if information is not marked "classified" in an e-mail, participants who know or should know that the subject matter is classified are still obligated to protect it.

While not the focus of our investigation, we also developed evidence that the security culture of the State Department in general, and with respect to use of unclassified e-mail systems in particular, was generally lacking in the kind of care for classified information found elsewhere in the government.

With respect to potential computer intrusion by hostile actors, we did not find direct evidence that Secretary Clinton's personal e-mail domain, in its various configurations since 2009, was successfully hacked. But, given the nature of the system and of the actors potentially involved, we assess that we would be unlikely to see such direct evidence...we assess it is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton’s personal e-mail account.

Regarding the FBI recommendation Comey said:

Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case. Prosecutors necessarily weigh a number of factors before bringing charges. There are obvious considerations, like the strength of the evidence, especially regarding intent. Responsible decisions also consider the context of a person's actions, and how similar situations have been handled in the past.

In looking back at our investigations into mishandling or removal of classified information, we cannot find a case that would support bringing criminal charges on these facts. All the cases prosecuted involved some combination of: clearly intentional and willful mishandling of classified information; or vast quantities of materials exposed in such a way as to support an inference of intentional misconduct; or indications of disloyalty to the United States; or efforts to obstruct justice. We do not see those things here.

To be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences. To the contrary, those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions. But that is not what we are deciding now.

As a result, although the Department of Justice makes final decisions on matters like this, we are expressing to Justice our view that no charges are appropriate in this case.

Finally, Comey said:

What I can assure the American people is that this investigation was done competently, honestly, and independently. No outside influence of any kind was brought to bear.

I know there were many opinions expressed by people who were not part of the investigation—including people in government—but none of that mattered to us. Opinions are irrelevant, and they were all uninformed by insight into our investigation, because we did the investigation the right way. Only facts matter, and the FBI found them here in an entirely apolitical and professional way.

Source:

Comey, James B. (July 5, 2016). "Statement by FBI Director James B. Comey on the Investigation of Secretary Hillary Clinton's Use of a Personal E-Mail System". fbi.gov. Retrieved 2016-07-05.

Tonight, on the Fox News program The Kelly File U.S. Speaker of the House of Representatives Paul Ryan told host Megyn Kelly that Republicans will hold hearings to probe deeper into the FBI's recommendation to not charge Clinton with any crime.

Ryan also posted the following statement on his official website:

While I respect the law enforcement professionals at the FBI, this announcement defies explanation. No one should be above the law. But based upon the director's own statement, it appears damage is being done to the rule of law. Declining to prosecute Secretary Clinton for recklessly mishandling and transmitting national security information will set a terrible precedent. The findings of this investigation also make clear that Secretary Clinton misled the American people when she was confronted with her criminal actions. While we need more information about how the Bureau came to this recommendation, the American people will reject this troubling pattern of dishonesty and poor judgment

Source:

Ryan, Paul. (July 5, 2016). "Statement on the FBI's Investigation of Secretary Clinton". speaker.gov. Retrieved 2016-07-05.

Read Factcheck's detailed analysis here.

Jul 1, 2016

Speaking at the Aspen Ideas Festival in Colorado, U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch said she will accept the recommendations of the FBI and "career prosecutors" (her staff at the U.S. Department of Justice) on whether criminal charges are filed against Hillary Clinton.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.