Throughout his testimony Thursday before the House oversight committee, FBI Director James Comey defended his decision not to recommend criminal charges against Hillary Clinton arising from her use of a private email server. But he also gave House Republicans some material to work with in attacking Clinton and the way she handled classified information as secretary of state.
Comey assiduously avoided being drawn into partisan politics during his hours of testimony Thursday, and repeatedly denied that politics influenced his decision not to recommend that prosecutors pursue a criminal case against Clinton. But the hearing was drenched in politics, and Republicans were intent on eliciting from Comey comments and judgments that could be used against Clinton in the presidential campaign and perhaps beyond November.
Republicans succeeded on more than one occasion in getting Comey to give franks assessments that could prove to be damaging to Clinton. But in many instances Comey hedged or offered elaboration that worked to Clinton’s political advantage. All in all it was a mixed bag, much as his press conference earlier in the week had been, in which is offered Clinton the political good news of no criminal charges but called her handling of classified information “extremely careless.”
Mishandling classified info can result in professional consequences
During an exchange with Rep. Ron Desantis (R-FL), Comey acknowledged that when government employees mishandle classified information, they can be reprimanded at work.
“In your statement, you did point out that administrative and security consequences would be appropriate if someone demonstrated extreme carelessness for classified information. So those consequences, that would include potentially termination of federal employment?” Desantis asked Comey.
“Correct,” Comey replied.
Comey also said that it could result in revoking a security clearance, when asked by Desantis.
“And it could include your ineligibility for future positions?” Desantis then asked.
“It could,” Comey responded.
Potential bad precedent for government employees
Comey said he was worried that the conclusion in the investigation into Clinton’s use of email could set a bad precedent for government employees future handling of classified information.
Rep. Will Hurd (R-TX) asked Comey, “Did you take into any consideration the impact that this precedent can set on our ability to collect intelligence overseas?”
“Yes,” Comey replied. “My primary concern is the impact on what other employees might think in the federal government.”
“And you don’t think this sends a message to other employees that if the former secretary of state can have an unauthorized server in their basement that transmits top secret information, that that’s not a problem?” Hurd then asked.
“Oh, I worry very much about that,” Comey responded. “That’s why I talked about that in my statement. Because an FBI employee might face severe discipline, and I want them to understand that those consequences are still going to be there.”
Clinton may not have understood when information was classified
Much of the House hearing with Comey focused on three emails that Clinton received that had markings in paragraphs noting that the information was confidential, but lacked headers noting that they contained confidential information. The confidential information would be marked with a “C” in parentheses.
Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC) asked Comey if Clinton should have known that the emails contained classified information based on that marking.
“So a reasonable person who has been a senator, a secretary of state, a first lady, wouldn’t a reasonable person know that that was a classified marking?” Meadows asked.
“Yeah, before this investigation, I probably would have said yes. I’m not so sure,” Comey replied. “I don’t find it incredible.”
Meadows found Comey’s response surprising.
“Director Comey, come on. I mean, I’ve only been here a few years, and I understand the importance of those markings,” the congressman said. “So you’re suggesting that a long length of time that she had no idea what a classified marking would be? That’s your sworn testimony today?”
“No, no,” Comey responded. “Not that she would have no idea what a classified marking would be. But it’s an interesting question as to whether — this question about sophistication came up earlier — whether she was actually sophisticated enough to understand what a ‘C’ in parens means.”
“So you’re saying this former secretary of state is not sophisticated enough to understand a classified marking?” Meadows then asked
“That’s not what I said,” Comey shot back. “Not what I’m saying. You asked me did I assume that someone would know. Probably before this investigation, I would have. I’m not so sure of that answer any longer. I think it’s possible — possible — that she didn’t understand what a ‘C’ meant when she saw it in the body of an e-mail like that. It’s possible.”
Did Clinton lie?
At the beginning of the hearing, Chairman Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) jumped quickly to questions about whether Clinton lied about her handling of classified information. The former secretary of state had stated that she did not send of receive classified information over email, but the FBI found classified information on her private server.
Throughout Chaffetz’s questions, Comey acknowledged that there was classified information on Clinton’s server, but he avoided saying that Clinton lied about classified information on her server.
“Did Hillary Clinton lie?” Chaffetz asked.
“To the FBI? We have no basis to conclude she lied to the FBI,” Comey replied.
Chaffetz then asked if Clinton lied to the public, to which Comey responded that he was not qualified to answer that question.
The congressman followed up by asking if Clinton lied under oath.
“Not to the FBI. Not in a case we were working,” Comey responded.
And when Chaffetz asked if Clinton lied in her testimony to Congress, Comey said that the FBI had not conducted a review of her congressional testimony.
Bring up Manafort
Mention that there weren’t any server hacks (caveat: that’s a hedge)
Bring up previous Trump deals involving either email or foreign policy.
Nutshell: don’t fear the reaper
Bollocks!
As I pointed out earlier today, a choice little crack in the Comey bullshitter wall of bullshit press conference appeared thanks to the State Department yesterday (as noted over at the Great Orange Satan, no not Trump)… yesterday afternoon State Department spokesman John Kirby said that the only two e-mails that had a classified marking on them prior to being sent (doesn’t say if it is to or from Clinton) were “call sheets” that were only classified as some sort of internal process:
Describing a somewhat opaque internal process, spokesman John Kirby says officials often mark “call sheets” at the confidential level when the secretary of state is considering whom he or she will call. Once the secretary decides to make the call, the call sheets would be no longer classified.
Kirby says the markings on the Clinton emails mentioned by FBI Director James Comey “were no longer necessary or appropriate” as Clinton already had decided to make the calls.
One of the key elements to this story (that she knowingly sent marked classified materials) painting Clinton in a harsh light has been destroyed. So what Kirby said what the State Dept knows is there were 2 emails with Hillary’s own telephone call schedules in them. The call schedules are marked confidential until Hillary decides to make the phone calls, and then they aren’t confidential anymore, but some staffer forgot to remove the confidential marking.
As the New York Times noted…
One email, dated Aug. 2, 2012, noted that Kofi Annan, the former secretary general of the United Nations, was stepping down as special envoy trying to mediate the war in Syria. A second one, sent in April 2012, discussed Mrs. Clinton’s call to the newly inaugurated president of Malawi.
Each was marked with a small notation, “(C),” indicating it contained information classified as “confidential.”
These are are call sheets that once the Secretary made the calls, were no longer classified “confidential” but a staffer forgot to remove the small (c) markings after the Secretary had already made the calls in question.
This is like having a press release that says embargoed for public release until January 1, 2012 being emailed to someone on February 1, 2012 and forgetting to take off the “embargoed until January 1, 2012” stamp then screaming that “Clinton received emails that were embarked for public release” on a private email account on her private email server that in theory someone form the public could potentially been able to hack and read that already email which was no-longer embargoed when it was sent.
Just to add as a reminder, if someone emailed the New York Times article on the classified drone program to Sec. Clinton, she would have “information that is classified at the time of the email” on her hard drive using the Comey standard, even though the entire world can read the New York Times articles about the classified drone program for themselves.
The GOP would hold more investigations of Hillary Clinton no matter what. It’s what they do. It means they don’t have to govern, they get free press coverage, and they don’t even have to know anything. Their problem is that they always over do it, they always over reach. Even as the press corpse, gapes in anticipation of a “kill”; “yeah, this time she’s really gonna get it”; with scavanger-like like fascination and obsession, voters will tune them out as they rightfully conclude that it’s all just politics.
Edit. For another perspective: