Hillary Clinton email investigation
From Ballotpedia - Reading time: 61 min
 Democratic presidential nominee Running mate: Tim Kaine |
Democratic National Convention • Polls • Debates • Presidential election by state |
Domestic affairs • Economic affairs and government regulations • Foreign affairs and national security • Hillarycare • Tenure as U.S. senator • Tenure as secretary of state • Email investigation • Paid speeches • WikiLeaks • Media coverage of Clinton |
Donald Trump (R) • Jill Stein (G) • Gary Johnson (L) • Vice presidential candidates |
2028 • 2024 • 2020 • 2016 |
Ballotpedia's scope changes periodically, and this article type is no longer actively created or maintained. If you would like to help our coverage grow, consider donating to Ballotpedia.
While serving as secretary of state from 2009 to 2013, Hillary Clinton said she exclusively used a private email account to send both personal messages and communications related to official State Department business.[1][2] By managing her email in this manner, Clinton potentially violated record-keeping, transparency, and security regulations.[3][4][5]
There were three lines of inquiry into Clinton's emails:
- Several journalists and watchdog groups filed Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests for Clinton's records, including her emails. The resulting federal court cases led to greater scrutiny of Clinton's private email server usage.[6]
- The House Select Committee on Benghazi, which investigated how the State Department handled the 2012 terrorist attack on the U.S. embassy in Benghazi, Libya, requested information about the management of Clinton's private email server and communications related to Benghazi.[7]
- In August 2015, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) began an investigation to determine whether classified documents were mishandled in relation to Clinton's private email server.[8]
Regulations governing electronic document storage[edit]
Protocol for the retention and security of official government documents is governed by several regulations: the Federal Records Act, guidelines issued by the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and Section 1924 under Title 18 of the United States Code.[14] Some of these rules were changed to more directly address electronic records after Clinton left her position as secretary of state in 2013.
Regulations in place during Clinton's tenure as secretary of state[edit]
- The Federal Records Act contains the following guidelines for record management:
| “ | The head of each Federal agency shall make and preserve records containing adequate and proper documentation of the organization, functions, policies, decisions, procedures, and essential transactions of the agency and designed to furnish the information necessary to protect the legal and financial rights of the Government and of persons directly affected by the agency’s activities.[15][16] | ” |
- The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) also offers guidance on record retention. In 1995, its regulations stipulated the following:
| “ | Agencies with access to external electronic mail systems shall ensure that Federal records sent or received on these systems are preserved in the appropriate recordkeeping system and that reasonable steps are taken to capture available transmission and receipt data needed by the agency for recordkeeping purposes.[17][18][16] | ” |
- The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) was created to "foster democracy by ensuring public access to agency records and information."[19] Anyone can make a FOIA request for official government documents. If the information requested falls under one of nine exemption categories, it is not required to be disclosed. "Information that is classified to protect national security" is an example of an exemption category.[20]
- 18 U.S.C. § 1924 makes it criminal for an employee or contractor of the United States to "knowingly" remove classified documents or retain them at "an unauthorized location."[21]
Regulations established after Clinton's tenure as secretary of state[edit]
In September 2013, NARA issued new guidance covering email usage. According to NARA, "agency employees must ensure that all Federal records sent or received on personal email systems are captured and managed in accordance with agency recordkeeping practices."[22] The guidance also noted federal employees should not use personal email accounts for official business except where there is an emergency or issue with accessibility.[23]
In November 2014, President Barack Obama signed into law the Presidential and Federal Records Act Amendments of 2014, which modernized regulations governing electronic document storage. The law updated the Federal Records Act to explicitly include electronic records in the definition of federal records and clarified the duties of federal officials who maintained non-government email systems.[24] One significant change in the law required federal employees who used "a non-official electronic messaging account" to copy the employee's official account when sending messages or forward the record no later than 20 days after it was created.[25]
Potential liability[edit]
Clinton's potential criminal liability arose under 18 U.S.C. § 1924, the issue being whether she "knowingly" retained classified documents on her private email server.[26] According to the Associated Press on August 31, 2015, experts in government secrecy law believed there was little chance criminal charges would be filed against Clinton. “[T]o prove a crime, the government would have to demonstrate that Clinton or aides knew they were mishandling the information — not that she should have known. A case would be possible if material emerges that is so sensitive Clinton must have known it was highly classified, whether marked or not. … But no such email has surfaced,” the AP noted.[27]
Anne Tompkins, the former U.S. attorney who prosecuted Gen. David Petraeus under 18 U.S.C. § 1924, also suggested that it was unlikely Clinton could be prosecuted. “The key element that distinguishes Secretary Clinton’s email retention practices from Petraeus’ sharing of classified information is that Petraeus knowingly engaged in unlawful conduct, and that was the basis of his criminal liability,” Tompkins stated.[28]
On August 31, 2015, former Vice President Dick Cheney said he found it incredible that Clinton did not know the dangers of maintaining her email on a private server. "I know from my own experience that when you go into those kinds of jobs, you're briefed on the enormous importance of being very careful with how you handle classified information. In fact, it looks to me like she approached it in a sort of amateurish, nonprofessional way," Cheney said. Referencing a 2015 data security breach at the Office of Personnel Management, Cheney said of hackers, “They've got my personnel records. How can they not have her emails?”[29]
Politico conducted a survey of recent federal investigations into the mishandling of classified information and concluded on April 11, 2016, that nearly all of those prosecuted included an “aggravating circumstance” not apparent in Clinton’s use of a private email server. “Between 2011 and 2015, federal prosecutors disposed of 30 referrals from investigators in cases where the main proposed charge was misdemeanor mishandling of classified information .... Prosecution was declined in 80 percent of those cases. Of the six where charges were filed, all the defendants apparently pled guilty, the data show. The cases indicate that a strong dose of prosecutorial discretion is involved, partly because the laws on mishandling classified information are written broadly,” Josh Gerstein of Politico noted.[30]
Clinton's private email server[edit]
Prior to being sworn in as secretary of state on January 21, 2009, Clinton and her aides decided that she would use a private email account while working for the State Department.[31][32] According to Clinton's 2015 presidential campaign website, she elected to use a private email account "as a matter of convenience," since previous secretaries of state had done the same. It allowed her to "reach people quickly and keep in regular touch with her family and friends more easily given her travel schedule."[2]
On January 13, 2009, Justin Cooper, an aide to the Clintons, registered the domain clintonemail.com and linked it to a server at the Clintons' home address in Chappaqua, New York. Cooper was initially responsible for the system, although he had "no security clearance and no particular expertise in safeguarding computers."[33] Clinton also hired Bryan Pagliano—the former IT director of Clinton's 2008 presidential campaign and a State Department employee—to manage the server as a "lead specialist." The Washington Post reported that Pagliano was frequently called on to address server issues. After Hurricane Sandy hit New York in October 2012 and the system crashed, Clinton hired Platte River Networks to manage the server and provide "better security, durability, and a more professional setup."[33]
At some point after Clinton finished her service as secretary of state, the server was transferred to a data center in New Jersey.[34] According to U.S. Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) in March 2015, Clinton "unilaterally decided to wipe her server clean and permanently delete all emails from her personal server."[35] David Kendall, Clinton's attorney, said that Clinton "chose not to keep her non-record personal emails" but "has maintained and preserved copies" of work-related communications.[35] On August 12, 2015, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) reportedly took possession of the email server.[34]
The Washington Post reported on September 12, 2015, that personal correspondence from Clinton's server could be recoverable. Platte River Networks, the company that managed the server beginning in 2013, said it had “no knowledge of the server being wiped.”[36] Datto, Inc., a private technology company hired by Platte River to produce backups of Clinton’s email accounts, announced on October 6, 2015, that it would provide the FBI with the data it had preserved from those accounts. Clinton consented to the release.[37]
On October 7, 2015, the Associated Press reported that hackers located in China, South Korea and Germany had attempted to infiltrate Hillary Clinton’s private email server in 2013. The cyberattacks were blocked by a “threat monitoring” service. It is not yet known whether the attempted attacks were targeted or a “nuisance” attack directed at servers around the world.[38]
Discovery of Clinton's private email server[edit]
News that Clinton used a private email account while working for the State Department first broke in March 2013 after a hacker, using the handle "Guccifer," allegedly gained access to the email account of Sidney Blumenthal, an advisor to Clinton. Guccifer provided screenshots to media outlets showing Blumenthal sent numerous messages related to national security to hdr22@clintonemail.com, which many media outlets correctly presumed belonged to Clinton.[39][40][41]
State Department officials contacted Clinton in the summer of 2014 after they discovered they did not have access to many of her emails. State Department spokesman John Kirby said, "In the process of responding to congressional document requests pertaining to Benghazi, State Department officials recognized that it had access to relatively few email records from former Secretary Clinton. State Department officials contacted her representatives during the summer of 2014 to learn more about her email use and the status of emails in that account.”[42] In October 2014, the State Department requested the work-related emails of Clinton and other former secretaries of state after the State Department noted it also "did not have extensive email records from prior Secretaries of State."[42]
The following month, the House Select Committee on Benghazi requested access to Clinton's emails regarding the 2012 attack in Benghazi. Clinton provided 300 emails. An additional set of emails, produced from other officials' email accounts, had been provided to the committee in August 2014 by the State Department.[1] On December 5, 2014, Clinton released 30,490 printed emails to the State Department. Another 31,830 emails were determined to be private and not released.[1]
Nearly three months later, on March 2, 2015, Michael Schmidt of The New York Times reported that Clinton "exclusively used a personal email account to conduct government business as secretary of state...and may have violated federal requirements that officials’ correspondence be retained as part of the agency’s record."[43]
Clinton's public disclosures[edit]
| Hillary Clinton's first public statement regarding her private email server on March 10, 2015 |
The day after Schmidt's story was published in The New York Times, Clinton tweeted, "I want the public to see my email. I asked State to release them. They said they will review them for release as soon as possible."[1]
During a press conference at the United Nations to discuss women's rights on March 10, 2015, Clinton made her first public address regarding the issue of her private email server. She said, "I opted for convenience to use my personal email account, which was allowed by the State Department, because I thought it would be easier to carry just one device for my work and for my personal emails instead of two."[44]
Clinton also noted that majority of the emails she sent were delivered to government employees with government addresses. Such messages were captured on the State Department system. She also provided the State Department with 55,000 pages' worth of emails per their request after she left office as secretary of state, but she retained personal emails unrelated to State Department business. Clinton also claimed she requested that the State Department make these emails available to the public.[44]
| Clinton's full remarks regarding her private email server on March 10, 2015 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||||
Public apology[edit]
On September 8, 2015, Clinton apologized for using the private email server while serving as secretary of state. She said, “I take responsibility and I am trying to be as transparent as I possibly can.”[45] Clinton told ABC News that her conduct had been a “mistake,” but she also said, “I am confident by the end of this campaign, people will know they can trust me, and that I will be on their side and I will fight for them and their families. But I do think I could have and should have done a better job answering questions earlier. I really didn’t, perhaps, appreciate the need to do that.”[45]
Clinton had previously avoided apologizing in an interview with NBC News' Andrea Mitchell on September 4, 2015. When Mitchell asked Clinton if she was sorry, she responded, "Well, I certainly wish that I had made a different choice and I know why the American people have questions about it and I want to make sure that I answer those questions. Starting with the fact that my personal email use was fully above board, it was allowed by the State Department, as they have confirmed, but in retrospect, it certainly would have been better.”[46] CNN senior political commentator David Axelrod commented that Clinton’s evolving responses to the email investigation lengthened the process. “She's trying to bring this thing to an end so she can be heard on other subjects, but she needs a consistent answer,” said Axelrod.[47][48]
State Department's disclosures[edit]
First batch of emails released[edit]
On May 22, 2015, the State Department made public 296 emails related to Benghazi between January 1, 2011, and December 31, 2012. They included initial exchanges between Clinton and her aides about when she should make a statement regarding the death of U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens following the attack on the embassy. Two weeks later, Jacob Sullivan, a Clinton aide, sent a detailed 24-page study of every statement Clinton made after the attacks, assuring her, "You never said spontaneous [sic] or characterized the motives. In fact you were careful in your first statement to say we were assessing motive and method."[49][50]
Clinton also received emails from Sullivan and other advisers on the fragile environment in Libya. In one 2011 email, Sullivan warned Clinton of a "credible threat against the hotel that our team is using," requiring relocation of the personnel. A 2012 email from the former ambassador to Libya, Gene Cretz, said there was "concern here that continuing rivalries among the militias remains dangerous from the perspective of the havoc they can wreak with their firepower and their continued control of select turf."[50] Other emails pertained to missing intelligence and the Clinton team's impression of an interview with Wall Street Journal reporter Monica Langley.[50]
Second batch of emails released[edit]
On May 27, 2015, Judge Rudolph Contreras of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia issued a court order requiring the State Department to release copies of Clinton's emails in batches every month beginning on June 30, 2015.[51]
The second batch was released on June 30, 2015, totaling about 3,000 pages.[52] These emails revisited the relationship between Clinton and her unofficial adviser Blumenthal. Clinton had previously attempted to secure a job for Blumenthal at the State Department in 2009, but the effort was blocked by the Obama administration. In addition to offering advice on Libya, Blumenthal also provided commentary on the Northern Ireland peace process, politics in Iran and Britain, and climate change.[53]
The emails also showed a disconnect between Clinton and the Obama administration in the early months of her tenure. In July 2009, Clinton sent an email to her aides inquiring whether there was a Cabinet meeting that day as she had heard "on the radio." She added, "Is there? Can I go?"[53]
Although the Obama administration said it was unaware of Clinton's private email server use, this second batch revealed that Clinton communicated with Obama aide David Axelrod and offered White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel her email address. Axelrod told CNN, "I knew it wasn't a government address. I didn't know that she used it exclusively."[54]
Third batch of emails released[edit]
On July 31, 2015, a third batch of "heavily redacted" emails was released.[55] Republican National Committee Chair Reince Priebus said of the release, "Today's email dump shows Hillary Clinton put even more sensitive government information at risk on her secret email server than previously known. Hillary Clinton's reckless attempt to bypass public records laws put our national security at risk and shows she cannot be trusted in the White House."[56]
The majority of emails covered discussions between Clinton's aides on domestic and world events and more personal messages from Washington insiders. Staffers also discussed retrospectives on Clinton's image and the "political spinning of a major cabinet official with an eye on the presidency."[56]
Fourth batch of emails released[edit]
A fourth batch of emails was released by the State Department on August 31, 2015. Featuring approximately 7,000 pages of emails, it included more correspondence between Clinton and Sidney Blumenthal. In one exchange, Clinton disagreed with Blumenthal over whether Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission could be addressed legislatively. Clinton believed it would likely take a constitutional amendment to change.[57] Hundreds of the emails were redacted and retroactively classified.
Fifth batch of emails released[edit]
In the fifth batch of emails released on September 30, 2015, Clinton and her aides discussed the relative security of government-issued email accounts and those on private servers in June 2011. "NO ONE uses a State-issued laptop and even high officials routinely end up using their home email accounts to be able to get their work done quickly and effectively," one aide wrote. Cheryl Mills, Clinton's chief of staff, was more cautious. "I am not sure we want to telegraph how much folks do or don't do off state mail (because) it may encourage others who are out there," Mills wrote, referring to the suspected hack of senior U.S. government officials' Gmail accounts by Chinese hackers.[58]
Another exchange saw Clinton displeased with the move to change "mother and father" to "parent one and parent two" on State Department forms. “I’m not defending that decision, which I disagree [with] and knew nothing about, in front of this Congress. I could live [with] letting people in nontraditional families choose another descriptor so long as we retained the presumption of mother and father," Clinton wrote in the exchange.[59]
Sixth batch of emails released[edit]
On October 30, 2015, the State Department released a sixth batch of emails totaling 7,000 pages.[60] Although one exchange involved discussions of embassy security in Afghanistan and Pakistan, most emails related to the daily operations of managing Clinton's schedule.[60][61]
The New York Times reported on the same day that the White House intended to prevent communications between President Obama and Clinton from being released. "There is a long history of presidential records being kept confidential while the president is in office. It is a principle that previous White Houses have vigorously defended as it goes to the core of the president’s ability to receive unvarnished advice and counsel," said a White House official.[62] William Burck, who served as deputy counsel for former President George W. Bush, described the decision as "very reasonable." He said, “Direct communications by the president and his senior advisers are really at the very center of what is trying to be protected by executive privilege and the separation of powers."[62]
Seventh batch of emails released[edit]
The State Department released a seventh batch of emails totaling nearly 8,000 pages on November 30, 2015. This release included 328 emails that were later deemed “Confidential,” the lowest designation for classified information.[63] Most of the emails came from Clinton's final years at the State Department in 2012 and 2013.[64]
An email sent in November 2012 demonstrated Clinton's team was sensitive to transmitting classified documents online. In this email, an aide informed Clinton that a courier had been sent to deliver a memo because it "was classified so we could not email to you."[65]
Eighth batch of emails released[edit]
On December 31, 2015, the State Department released approximately 5,500 pages of emails. Per a court order, the agency was supposed to have released 82 percent of Clinton's emails by this date, but only 76 percent were made available online. "We have worked diligently to come as close to the goal as possible, but with the large number of documents involved and the holiday schedule we have not met the goal this month. To narrow that gap, the State Department will make another production of former Secretary Clinton’s email sometime next week," read a press release from the agency.[66]
Ninth batch of emails released[edit]
The State Department released another 3,000 pages of emails on January 8, 2016, after it missed a production deadline the previous week. In one email, after Jake Sullivan informed Clinton that staff members were having difficulty sending a document with talking points to her through secure fax, Clinton recommended he turn it into a "nonpaper" without an "identifying heading and send nonsecure." Because portions of this email exchange were redacted, it is unknown whether the talking points document contained classified information.[67]
In another email, Clinton questioned a State Department staffer's use of personal email to provide information about Libya and Muammar Qadhafi. "Is he in [the Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs] currently? Or was he in Embassy? I was surprised that he used personal email account if he is at State," Clinton wrote.[67]
Tenth batch of emails released[edit]
On January 29, 2016, the State Department released approximately 2,000 pages of emails, although it failed to meet its court-ordered deadline for complete production.[68] This batch did not include 22 emails which the Obama administration identified as containing "top secret" material.[68]
Eleventh batch of emails released[edit]
The State Department released 1,000 pages of emails on February 13, 2016. Eighty-four of the emails contained redacted text that has now been deemed classified.[69]
The released emails included discussion of a growing insurgency in the Sinai Peninsula, then-Sen. John Kerry's visit to Pakistan following the death of Osama bin Laden and Israeli-Palestinian relations.[69]
Twelfth batch of emails released[edit]
On February 19, 2016, the State Department released 1,100 additional pages of emails. This twelfth batch included 64 retroactively classified emails and exchanges about the U.S. military intervention in Libya, Clinton’s authority to direct foreign policy and commentary on Vice President Joe Biden’s performance in a 2012 vice presidential debate.[70]
Thirteenth batch of emails released[edit]
In its penultimate release on February 26, 2016, the State Department made public nearly 1,600 pages of emails. Eighty-eight documents were classified as "confidential."[71] According to VICE News, these emails "cover a wide-range of topics, including the CIA's torture program, the Keystone pipeline, US-Israel relations, the Arab Spring in Egypt, the death of Osama bin Laden, climate change, Guantanamo detainees, and Wikileaks document leaks."[72]
Fourteenth batch of emails released[edit]
The State Department issued its final release of Clinton's emails on February 29, 2016, encompassing 3,871 pages. Altogether, there were 52,402 pages of emails released; 2,101 of those were retroactively categorized as containing classified information. The Washington Post reported, "Nearly all of the emails were classified by the State Department at the 'confidential' level, the lowest level of sensitivity, but 44 were classified at the 'secret' level. An additional 22 emails were withheld from public release entirely because they were deemed 'top secret,' the most sensitive level of classification."[73][74]
Suspension of internal investigation[edit]
Reuters reported on April 2, 2016, that the State Department suspended its plans for an internal investigation of how classified information was handled on Clinton’s private email server at the request of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). "The internal review is on hold, pending completion of the FBI's work. We'll reassess next steps after the FBI's work is complete,” said State Department spokeswoman Elizabeth Trudeau.[75]
Office of the Inspector General of the State Department[edit]
On February 3, 2016, Steve Linick, the inspector general for the State Department, noted in a memorandum that his office's review of the records of five secretaries of state — Madeleine Albright, Colin Powell, Condoleezza Rice, Hillary Clinton and John Kerry — had identified several instances where potentially sensitive material had been sent to the personal accounts of Powell and aides to Rice.[76]
Powell, after reviewing the emails under consideration, dismissed the assertion. He called the classification "an absurdity" in an interview with The New York Times. He added that if diplomats could not discuss policy in unclassified emails, then "we might as well shut the department down."[76]
Rice's chief of staff, Georgia Godfrey, made a similar claim, saying the emails sent to Rice's aides were "diplomatic conversations" that contained "no intelligence information.” Godfrey also said that that Rice did not use email or have a private email account while secretary of state.[76]
Report on Records Management and Cybersecurity Requirements[edit]
On May 25, 2016, the Office of the Inspector General of the State Department (OIG) released a report regarding email records management and cybersecurity standards in the agency.[9][77] In addition to providing an overview of past and current electronic records management practices, the OIG evaluated if the five most recent secretaries of state, including Clinton, properly complied with these regulations.
Clinton declined the OIG's request for an interview.[9] In an interview on May 26, 2016, Clinton discussed why she did not cooperate with the investigation, saying, “I have talked about this for many, many months. I testified for 11 hours before the Benghazi committee. I have answered numerous questions. We have posted information on our website and the information that we had is out there. It’s been clearly public and my email use was widely known throughout the department, throughout the government, and I have provided all of my work related emails, and I’ve asked that they be made public."[78]
Clinton's email usage and compliance with records management requirements[edit]
According to the OIG, Clinton should have preserved all federal records she sent or received on her personal email server. "At a minimum, Secretary Clinton should have surrendered all emails dealing with Department business before leaving government service and, because she did not do so, she did not comply with the Department’s policies that were implemented in accordance with the Federal Records Act," the OIG found.[9]
Although the OIG noted that Clinton's production of 55,000 pages of emails "mitigated" this noncompliance, it also found that Clinton's production was "incomplete."
The full text of this section of the report is reproduced below.
Former Secretary Clinton did not use a Department email account and has acknowledged using an email account maintained on a private server for official business. As discussed above, in December 2014, her representative produced to the Department 55,000 hard-copy pages of documents, representing approximately 30,000 emails that could potentially constitute Federal records that she sent or received from April 2009 through early 2013. Secretary Clinton’s representative asserted that, because the Secretary emailed Department officials at their government email accounts, the Department already had records of the Secretary’s email preserved within its recordkeeping systems. As previously discussed, however, sending emails from a personal account to other employees at their Department accounts is not an appropriate method of preserving any such emails that would constitute a Federal record. Therefore, Secretary Clinton should have preserved any Federal records she created and received on her personal account by printing and filing those records with the related files in the Office of the Secretary. At a minimum, Secretary Clinton should have surrendered all emails dealing with Department business before leaving government service and, because she did not do so, she did not comply with the Department’s policies that were implemented in accordance with the Federal Records Act. NARA agrees with the foregoing assessment but told OIG that Secretary Clinton’s production of 55,000 pages of emails mitigated her failure to properly preserve emails that qualified as Federal records during her tenure and to surrender such records upon her departure. OIG concurs with NARA but also notes that Secretary Clinton’s production was incomplete. For example, the Department and OIG both determined that the production included no email covering the first few months of Secretary Clinton’s tenure—from January 21, 2009, to March 17, 2009, for received messages; and from January 21, 2009, to April 12, 2009, for sent messages. OIG discovered multiple instances in which Secretary Clinton’s personal email account sent and received official business email during this period. For instance, the Department of Defense provided to OIG in September 2015 copies of 19 emails between Secretary Clinton and General David Petraeus on his official Department of Defense email account; these 19 emails were not in the Secretary’s 55,000-page production. OIG also learned that the 55,000-page production did not contain some emails that an external contact not employed by the Department sent to Secretary Clinton regarding Department business. In an attempt to address these deficiencies, NARA requested that the Department inquire with Secretary Clinton’s “internet service or email provider” to determine whether it is still possible to retrieve the email records that might remain on its servers. The Department conveyed this request to Secretary Clinton’s representative and on November 6, 2015, the Under Secretary for Management reported to NARA that the representative responded as follows:
With regard to Secretary Clinton’s immediate staff, OIG received limited responses to its questionnaires, though two of Secretary Clinton’s staff acknowledged occasional use of personal email accounts for official business. However, OIG learned of extensive use of personal email accounts by four immediate staff members (none of whom responded to the questionnaire). During the summer of 2015, their representatives produced Federal records in response to a request from the Department, portions of which included material sent and received via their personal email accounts. The material consists of nearly 72,000 pages in hard copy and more than 7.5 gigabytes of electronic data. One of the staff submitted 9,585 emails spanning January 22, 2009, to February 24, 2013, averaging 9 emails per workday sent on a personal email account. In this material, there are instances where the four individuals sent or received emails regarding Department business using only their personal web-based email accounts. Accordingly, these staff failed to comply with Department policies intended to implement NARA regulations, because none of these emails were preserved in Department recordkeeping systems prior to their production in 2015. As noted above, NARA has concluded that these subsequent productions mitigated their failure to properly preserve emails that qualified as Federal records during their service as Department employees. However, OIG did not attempt to determine whether these productions were complete. None of these individuals are currently employed by the Department.[9][79] |
Reactions to the OIG report[edit]
Clinton spokesman Brian Fallon said in a statement on May 25, 2016, "While political opponents of Hillary Clinton are sure to misrepresent this report for their own partisan purposes, in reality, the Inspector General documents just how consistent her email practices were with those of other Secretaries and senior officials at the State Department who also used personal email." Fallon added that "there were reports about individuals in this office coming forward and suggesting there were hints of an anti-Clinton bias inside" the OIG.[80]
The following day, Clinton said in an interview, “This report makes clear that personal email use was the practice for other secretaries of state. It was allowed. And the rules have been clarified since I left."[78]
The Republican National Committee quickly responded with Chair Reince Priebus saying in a statement, "This detailed inquiry by an Obama appointee makes clear Hillary Clinton hasn’t been telling the truth since day one, and her and her aides’ refusal to cooperate with this probe only underscores that fact. Although Clinton has long claimed her practices were like those of other Secretaries of State and allowed, the report states she was in clear violation of the Federal Records Act. And her incredible 2010 email exchange with a top aide ruling out a State Department email address only further underscores her motivation was secrecy, not convenience."[81]
Donald Trump also called the report "bad news" for Clinton. He said that he was not certain he would be running against Clinton in the general election because of questions over her private email server use.[82]
Bernie Sanders declined to comment on the report. His campaign manager, Jeff Weaver, said in an interview, "Well, I think the report speaks for itself. This is obviously an area where the senator has chosen not to go. He's tried to keep this campaign on the issues."[83]
[edit]
As of September 2015, there were approximately 35 federal cases related to FOIA requests for emails sent or received by Clinton while she was secretary of state.[6] One claim by Vice News investigative reporter Jason Leopold predated Clinton's public recognition of her private email server. Leopold sued the State Department in January 2015 arguing it failed to timely respond to his November 4, 2014, FOIA request for "any and all records that were prepared, received, transmitted, collected and/or maintained by" the agency between January 21, 2009, and February 1, 2013, that related to Clinton.[84]
In May 2015, the State Department proposed releasing 55,000 pages of Clinton's emails on January 15, 2016, but Judge Rudolph Contreras of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia rejected this plan.[85][86] Instead, on May 27, 2015, Contreras ordered the State Department to produce batches of Clinton's emails every 30 days beginning June 30, 2015.[87]
Acknowledging the number of pending FOIA-related lawsuits, Contreras encouraged the parties to seek consolidation of the cases in July 2015. He said,"These are very unusual circumstances, and it would not take a wild imagination to think that there will be some discovery in these FOIA cases, and if six different judges start ordering six different forms of discovery, that's going to be impossible to manage for everybody. So give that some thought."[6] Efforts to consolidate these cases were formalized two months later. On September 3, 2015, the State Department requested that schedules for production be managed by one "coordinating judge," bringing “order” to the process.[88][89] Judge Reggie Walton, Contreras' colleague on the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, expressed skepticism that the cases could be consolidated. "Some information I’ve heard indicates there may be a reluctance on the part of judges to go along with that because [some cases] are so far along," said Walton.
In a report released on January 8, 2016, the Office of the Inspector General found the State Department had given “inaccurate and incomplete” answers to inquiries about Clinton’s records. “We know we must continue to improve our FOIA responsiveness and are taking additional steps to do so,” John Kirby, a spokesman for the State Department, said.[90]
The State Department requested a one-month extension to release the final batch of Clinton's emails on January 22, 2016. Lawyers for the agency argued a blizzard in Washington, D.C., had delayed production. The extension request also noted that 7,254 pages of emails that should have been sent to other agencies for review had never been transmitted, further delaying the process.[91]
A lawyer for Leopold, Ryan James, said in response to the request, "It's baffling why State needs a month to make up for only three days of snow-related office closures."[91] Judge Contreras scheduled a status hearing for February 9, 2016, to discuss the production schedule. [92] At the hearing, Contreras chastised the government for not meeting the original deadline and putting him "between a rock and a hard place." He ordered the agency to produce "a detailed explanation" for the delay.[93]
Depositions and discovery[edit]
On April 5, 2016, State Department lawyers requested that only "limited discovery" be granted in the case brought by Judicial Watch, including narrowing the scope of what could be asked in depositions of Clinton’s staffers. The Daily Beast reported that the “State’s lawyers proposed that the group only be allowed to ask questions about ‘the reasons for the creation of the clintonemail.com system,’ and not about how classified information was handled on the system or any issues related to protecting it from hackers.”[94]
Federal district judge Emmet Sullivan said on May 4, 2016, that it “may be necessary” to depose Clinton about her private email server as part of discovery in the Judicial Watch case relating to Clinton aide Huma Abedin’s simultaneous employment with the State Department and outside organizations. Sullivan added that “questions surrounding the creation, purpose, and use of the clintonemail.com server must be explored through limited discovery.”[95]
Sullivan decided May 26, 2016, that the recorded depositions of Mills and other members of Clinton's staff would not be released because the content of those depositions would otherwise be available. “The public has a right to know details related to the creation, purpose and use of the clintonemail.com system. Thus, the transcripts of all depositions taken in this case will be publicly available. It is therefore unnecessary to also make the audiovisual recording of Ms. Mills' deposition public,” Sullivan wrote.[96]
Mills was deposed on May 27, 2016, and a transcript of the deposition was released on May 31, 2016.[97] Mills characterized Clinton's private email use as “a continuation of a practice that she had been using as a senator” and indicated that it "would have been smarter for" Clinton to have used a different system given the complications created when responding to FOIA request.[98]
Bryan Pagliano, the State Department employee who set up Clinton’s private email server, declined to participate in a deposition scheduled for June 6, 2016. In a filing on June 1, 2016, Pagliano’s lawyers said that he would invoke his Fifth Amendment rights. “Judicial Watch may move to unseal the materials at any time. Furthermore, in the event of a leak or data breach at the court reporting company, Mr. Pagliano would be hard-pressed to prevent further dissemination and republication of the video. Given that there is no proper purpose for videotaping the deposition in the first place, Judicial Watch’s preference should yield to the significant constitutional interests at stake,” they wrote.[99]
2017 rulings[edit]
In a separate suit, also filed by Judicial Watch, Judge Amit Mehta of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia ruled that the State Department did not conduct an appropriate search of the official state.gov email accounts of three of Clinton's aides: Huma Abedin, Cheryl Mills, and Jake Sullivan. Judge Mehta ordered the State Department to conduct a supplemental search of those accounts, with an order to update the court by September 22, 2017.[100]
Judge James E. Boasberg of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia dismissed, for the second time, a lawsuit filed by Judicial Watch and Cause for Action against the U.S. State Department. Both groups initially filed a lawsuit in 2015 claiming that former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton unlawfully removed federal records from the State Department and that the Department had failed to retain agency records, in violation of the Federal Records Act (FRA). Judge Boasberg dismissed that suit as moot, holding that the two groups were required to “allege an ongoing injury under the FRA, which they could do only if the Secretary and Archivist had been ‘unable or unwilling’ to recover emails that might be federal records.” The D.C. Circuit reversed, but on remand Judge Boasberg again ruled that the case was moot. He wrote, “Defendants and the FBI have recited chapter and verse of their efforts to recover Secretary Clinton’s emails. Those efforts went well beyond the mine-run search for missing federal records … and were largely successful, save for some emails sent during a two-month stretch. Even then, the FBI pursued every imaginable avenue to recover the missing emails. Plaintiffs, significantly, cast no real doubt on that conclusion. So now, when the Government avers that there are no enforcement steps left for the Attorney General, the Court takes such conclusion seriously. It thus finds that Defendants have ‘secur[ed] custody of all emails that the Attorney General could have recovered in an enforcement action,’ … such that the suit is moot.”[101]
House Select Committee on Benghazi[edit]
Formation and initial investigation[edit]
The House Select Committee on Benghazi was established on May 8, 2014, to investigate and issue a report on the "policies, decisions, and activities that contributed to" the September 11, 2012, terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya, which resulted in the death of four Americans—Ambassador Chris Stevens, Sean Smith, Glen Doherty, and Tyrone Woods.[102] Since Clinton was secretary of state during the attack, the committee initiated a review of her communications related to the incident.
On March 4, 2015, the committee subpoenaed Clinton to produce any and all documents about Libya between January 1, 2011, and December 31, 2012.[103]
The subpoena's production request read:
| “ | For the time period of January 1, 2011 through December 31, 2012, any and all documents and communications in your possession, and/or sent from or received by the email addresses "hdr22@clintonemail.com," "hrod17@clintonemail.com," or any other email address or communications device used by you or another on your behalf, referring or relating to:
(a) Libya (including but not limited to Benghazi and Tripoli); (b) weapons located or found in, imported or brought into, and/or exported or removed from Libya; (c) the attacks on U.S. facilities in Benghazi, Libya on September 11, 2012 and September 12, 2012; or (d) statements pertaining to the attacks on U.S. facilities in Benghazi, Libya on September 11, 2012 and September 12, 2012.[16] |
” |
In an interview on CNN on July 7, 2015, Clinton said she "never had a subpoena."[104] The following day, U.S. Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), the committee's chair, issued a statement in a press release to "correct the inaccuracy." He said, “The committee has issued several subpoenas, but I have not sought to make them public. I would not make this one public now, but after Secretary Clinton falsely claimed the committee did not subpoena her, I have no choice in order to correct the inaccuracy. The committee immediately subpoenaed Clinton personally after learning the full extent of her unusual email arrangement with herself, and would have done so earlier if the State Department or Clinton had been forthcoming that State did not maintain custody of her records and only Secretary Clinton herself had her records when Congress first requested them.” The press released included the March 4, 2015, subpoena to Clinton.[105]
A spokesman from Clinton's campaign, Nick Merrill, clarified Clinton's statement. Merrill said, "She was asked about her decision to not to retain her personal emails after providing all those that were work-related, and the suggestion was made that a subpoena was pending at the time. That was not accurate. In fact, Trey Gowdy did not issue a subpoena until March, months after she she'd done that review. Further, the subpoena was specifically asking for documents pertaining to Libya and the attacks on our facility in Benghazi, documents which, along with tens of thousands of others, she had already given to the Department of State."[106]
Depositions of Clinton aides[edit]
| Fox News, "Trey Gowdy on efforts to retrieve Hillary Clinton's emails," March 15, 2015. |
The committee continued to investigate Clinton's email practices, issuing subpoenas to testify to Bryan Pagliano, the former Clinton staffer who set up her private email server, and Cheryl Mills, Clinton's former chief staff. On August 31, 2015, Pagliano said that he did not intend to answer any questions after the committee subpoenaed him. Clinton’s campaign released the following statement in response: “We have been confident from the beginning that Hillary Clinton's use of a personal email was allowed and that she did not send or receive anything marked classified, facts confirmed by the State Department and the Inspector General. She has made every effort to answer questions and be as helpful as possible, and has encouraged her aides, current and former, to do the same, including Bryan Pagliano."[107]
In his deposition for the House Select Committee on Benghazi on September 10, 2015, Pagliano formally invoked the Fifth Amendment. Gowdy said the committee’s Republicans had prepared 19 pages of questions for Pagliano. “He has a right to not answer questions that he thinks may incriminate him," said Gowdy, "and you have a right to glean any inference you want from the fact that he has."[108]
U.S. Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.), a member of the committee, called Pagliano’s deposition “political theater.” In a statement released on September 10, 2015, Cummings said, “Mr. Pagliano’s testimony has nothing to do with the Benghazi attacks and everything to do with Republicans’ insatiable desire to derail Secretary Clinton’s presidential bid. If Chairman Gowdy actually wanted to find out what Mr. Pagliano knows, he would follow the lead of Senate Republicans and consider immunity – something Democrats would support.”[109]
Cheryl Mills, an advisor to Clinton, testified before the Select Committee on Benghazi on September 3, 2015. The committee rejected Mills’ request to testify in public, but Cummings asked the committee to release a copy of Mills’ testimony. “The entire public does not deserve to have leaks that are taken out of context, and leaving the wrong impression,” Cummings said.[110]
McCarthy's statement on committee purpose and partisan conflict[edit]
On September 29, 2015, U.S. Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) suggested that the Select Committee on Benghazi could take credit for causing Clinton’s poll numbers to drop. He said, “Everybody thought Hillary Clinton was unbeatable right? But we put together a Benghazi Special Committee, a select committee. What are her numbers today? Her numbers are dropping. Why? Cause she’s untrustable. But no one would have known any of that had happened had we not fought and made that happen.”[111]
| "Admit," Clinton's first national TV ad, October 6, 2015 |
Speaker of the House John Boehner (R-Ohio) repudiated McCarthy's statements on October 1, 2015. He said, "The House established the Select Committee on Benghazi to investigate what happened before, during, and after the terrorist attack in Benghazi, and to ensure that justice is finally served. This investigation has never been about former Secretary of State Clinton and never will be.”[112]
Although Gowdy maintained that the committee was not formed with the intention of investigating Clinton individually, Clinton’s supporters have pointed to McCarthy’s statement as evidence to the contrary. “Kevin McCarthy’s admission that the Benghazi Committee is a taxpayer funded political hit job to bring down Hillary Clinton should be the final straw for the media, for Members of Congress, for taxpayers and for the families of the four Americans who died in the Benghazi tragedy,” said David Brock, the founder of Media Matters, on September 30, 2015.[111] In an interview on October 5, 2015, Clinton commented, "This committee was set up, as they have admitted, for the purpose of making a partisan, political issue out of the deaths of four Americans. I would have never done that! And if I were president — and there were Republicans or Democrats who were thinking about that — I would have done everything to shut it down."[113]
On October 6, 2015, Clinton's campaign highlighted McCarthy's comments in its first national ad. “The Republicans finally admit it,” the ad’s narrator says before McCarthy's comments on the House Select Committee on Benghazi play. The narrator continues, “The Republicans have spent millions attacking Hillary because she’s fighting for everything they oppose, from affordable healthcare to equal pay. She’ll never stop fighting for you and the Republicans know it.”[114][115]
The following day, Gowdy wrote a 13-page letter to Cummings accusing him of leaking information to the press to create a “false narrative” beneficial to Clinton. Gowdy also noted the committee intended to release 1,500 of Clinton’s emails relating to Benghazi in the coming week. A substantial number of these emails include correspondence between Clinton and her informal political adviser, Sidney Blumenthal, who Gowdy said was motivated by money in providing advice to Clinton on Libya.[116] Cummings called the letter a “desperate attempt to save face” after McCarthy "admitted on national television that the Select Committee is a taxpayer-funded political campaign to attack Secretary Clinton's bid for president."[117]
In an interview that aired on CNN on October 11, 2015, Bradley Podliska, a major in the Air Force Reserve and former investigator for the House Select Committee on Benghazi, said he intended to file a lawsuit against that committee for unlawfully terminating him because he was "trying to conduct an objective, non-partisan, thorough investigation.”[118] The committee responded in a statement that Podliska was terminated “because he himself manifested improper partiality and animus in his investigative work” by targeting members of the Obama administration.[119]
U.S. Rep. Richard Hanna (R-N.Y.), said on October 14, 2015, that he too believed the committee was working to damage Clinton politically. “This may not be politically correct, but I think that there was a big part of this investigation that was designed to go after people and an individual, Hillary Clinton," Hanna said.[120]
Clinton's deposition[edit]
Clinton testified before the House Select Committee on Benghazi on October 22, 2015. Although U.S. Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) briefly asked Clinton about the operation of her private email server near the end of the 11-hour hearing, most lines of questioning focused on what kind of access Ambassador Chris Stevens had to Clinton, what security measures Stevens had requested and the nature of Clinton’s communications with her informal political adviser, Sidney Blumenthal. When asked if the committee learned anything new from the hearing, Gowdy said, “I don’t know that she testified that much differently today than she has the previous times she’s testified."[121][122][123]
Final committee reports[edit]
The proposed majority report for the House Select Committee on Benghazi was released on June 28, 2016. The 800-page document concluded that President Obama, then-Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, and then-Secretary of State Clinton, among others, failed to provide proper military support and protection to the Americans serving in Benghazi.[124][125]
The report also criticized Clinton's private email server use and the "shameful" obstruction that occurred throughout the investigation. The report stated "that what may appear at first blush to be a lack of competence on behalf of the State Department now appears fully intentional and coordinated. Delaying the production of documents sought by letter, informal request or subpoena has decided political advantages for those opposing the investigation.”[124]
Clinton commented on the report, "I understand that after more than two years and $7 million spent by the Benghazi Committee out of taxpayer funds, it had to today report it found nothing — nothing — to contradict the conclusions of the independent accountability board or the conclusion of the prior, multiple congressional investigations carried out on a bipartisan basis in the Congress. So while this unfortunately took on a partisan tinge, I want us to stay focused on what I’ve always wanted us to stay focused on, and that is the important work of diplomacy and development."[126]
A day earlier, the Democratic members of the House Select Committee on Benghazi released a minority report on the investigation into the events surrounding Benghazi. The report concluded that there was nothing that the Obama administration could have done to prevent the attack or save the Americans who were killed. It also noted that the "State Department’s security measures in Benghazi were woefully inadequate as a result of decisions made by officials in the Bureau of Diplomatic Security, but Secretary Clinton never personally denied any requests for additional security in Benghazi."[127][128]
FBI investigation[edit]
Recommendation to investigate[edit]
According to The New York Times on July 23, 2015, two inspectors general (IGs) requested that the Department of Justice launch an investigation to determine whether classified emails were mishandled in connection with Hillary Clinton's private email server.[129] When The New York Times first reported the story, it said the IGs' request was for a criminal investigation "into whether Hillary Rodham Clinton mishandled sensitive government information on a private email account she used as secretary of state." Editors later corrected the story to reflect that the request was for an inquiry, rather than a criminal investigation, and that it was directed at "whether sensitive government information was mishandled in connection with the personal email account Hillary Rodham Clinton used as secretary of state" rather than at Clinton individually.[130]
Clinton's spokesman, Nick Merrill, responded to the story on July 24, 2015, writing, “Contrary to the initial story, which has already been significantly revised, Clinton followed appropriate practices in dealing with classified materials. As has been reported on multiple occasions, any released emails deemed classified by the administration have been done so after the fact, and not at the time they were transmitted.”[131]
The Washington Post reported on August 4, 2015, that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) had begun to move forward with a preliminary investigation.[132] The inquiry's focus was on the security of Clinton's private email server and whether any classified information had been compromised. In an "unusual move," The New York Times noted, the investigation was being coordinated from the FBI's headquarters rather than a field office "to keep it closely held in Washington in the agency's counterintelligence section."[133]
Initial investigation[edit]
Clinton's campaign stated on August 11, 2015, that Clinton would release to the FBI her private email server and a thumb drive with copies of thousands of her emails. The announcement came on the same day members of Congress were told that “top secret” information was found on Clinton’s email system.[134] On August 19, 2015, Clinton’s campaign suggested that the “core” of the investigation was the product of a “dysfunctional system used by agencies to designate and safeguard classified documents.” Campaign spokesman Brian Fallon explained, “[Clinton] was at worst a passive recipient of unwitting information that subsequently became deemed as classified. … That’s why we are so confident that this review will remain a security-related review. We think that furthermore this matter is mostly just shining a spotlight on a culture of classification that exists within certain corners of the government, especially the intelligence community.”[135]
Emmet Sullivan, a federal judge, requested that the State Department work with the FBI to determine whether documents could be restored from Clinton's private email server.[136][137] In a letter dated August 21, 2015, James A. Baker, general counsel for the FBI, responded, "At this time, consistent with long-standing Department of Justice and FBI policy, we can neither confirm nor deny the existence of any ongoing investigation, nor are we in a position to provide additional information at this time."[138] Bloomberg reported on September 22, 2015, that the FBI had been able to recover some messages from Clinton's private email server.[139]
FOX News reported on January 11, 2016, that the FBI had expanded its investigation to include “the possible 'intersection' of Clinton Foundation donations, the dispensation of State Department contracts and whether regular processes were followed.” Clinton, however, denied the investigation involved issues of public corruption, saying, “No, there’s nothing like that that is happening.”[140]
The FBI confirmed in a letter made public on February 8, 2016, that it was conducting an investigation related to Clinton's private email server while secretary of state. Baker wrote that the FBI could not say more “without adversely affecting on-going law enforcement efforts.”[141]
Interviews with Clinton's aides[edit]
The Washington Post reported on March 2, 2016, that Bryan Pagliano, the State Department staffer who helped set up Clinton's private email server, had been granted immunity in exchange for his cooperation in a criminal investigation into whether classified material had been mishandled.[142] On March 6, 2016, Clinton said of Pagliano's involvement in the investigation, "It's a security review. I'm delighted that he has agreed to cooperate, as everyone else has. And I think that we'll be moving toward a resolution."[143]
The Los Angeles Times reported on March 27, 2016, that the FBI's investigation was in its final stage with interviews being scheduled for Clinton’s aides.[144] The following day, The Washington Post reported that there were 147 individuals working on the FBI investigation and noted that such a large number could indicate that the agency wanted to bring the matter to a close as soon as possible or that the investigation was more wide-ranging than publicly stated.[145] Politico stated later that afternoon that the number of investigators had been “greatly exaggerated,” according to their source.[146]
On March 30, 2016, a source told NBC News said that there were only 12 full-time agents working on the matter.[147]
Four of Clinton’s top aides, including her former chief of staff Heather Mills and deputy chief of staff Jake Sullivan, hired the same lawyer to represent them during the investigation. “The united front suggests they plan to tell investigators the same story — although legal experts say the unusual joint strategy still presents its own risks, should the interests of the four aides begin to diverge as the probe moves ahead,” Politico reported on April 1, 2016.[148]
Conclusion of investigation[edit]
FBI Director James Comey said on April 21, 2016, that the 2016 Democratic National Convention was not “a hard stop” deadline for the completion of the agency’s investigation into Clinton’s private email server. He continued, “We aspire to do all our investigations in two ways – well and promptly, especially investigations that are of great interest to the public. We want to do them promptly. I get that people care about this investigation, and so we're working very hard to ensure it's well and promptly. But as between the two, if we have to choose, we will do it well. But again we aspire to do it well and promptly.”[149]
On July 1, 2016, U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch stated that she would accept whatever recommendation the FBI made at the conclusion of its investigation.[150] Lynch's announcement came several days after she briefly met with former President Bill Clinton at an airport in Phoenix on June 27, 2016, "raising questions about whether the independence of the Justice Department...might have been compromised.”[151] When asked about the meeting, Lynch said that she and Bill Clinton primarily discussed his grandchildren. She added, however, "I certainly wouldn’t do it again.”[150]
Hillary Clinton participated in a voluntary interview with the FBI on July 2, 2016. “I’ve been eager to do it, and I was pleased to have the opportunity to assist the department in bringing its review to a conclusion,” Clinton said in an interview after the meeting. The Republican National Committee released a statement remarking that Clinton had “just taken the unprecedented step of becoming the first major party presidential candidate to be interviewed by the F.B.I. as part of a criminal investigation surrounding her reckless conduct."[152]
Final recommendation[edit]
James Comey, the director of the FBI, announced on July 5, 2016, that the agency found that "no charges [were] appropriate in this case."[10] He said in a statement, "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. ... 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."[10]
On July 7, 2016, Comey testified before the House Oversight Committee for more than four hours on his agency’s investigation and recommendation. "I think she was extremely careless. I think she was negligent—that I could establish. What we can't establish is that she acted with the necessary criminal intent,” Comey said. He noted that there were three emails found on her system marked as classified with the letter “C,” but added that Clinton “may not have been as sophisticated as people assume” as to recognize what the marking meant.[153]
Asked at the hearing how he would discipline an employee who exhibited the same behavior as Clinton, Comey said, “They might get fired, they might lose their clearance, it might get suspended for 30 days. There would be some discipline."[154] U.S. Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) also questioned Comey on whether the FBI had investigated if Clinton lied under oath about her private email server. Comey responded that he would need a referral from Congress to do so and Chaffetz pledged that such a request would be made.[155]
Decision of Justice Department[edit]
U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch announced on July 6, 2016, that the Justice Department would not pursue charges against Clinton. She said in a statement, “Late this afternoon, I met with FBI Director James Comey and career prosecutors and agents who conducted the investigation of Secretary Hillary Clinton’s use of a personal email system during her time as Secretary of State. I received and accepted their unanimous recommendation that the thorough, year-long investigation be closed and that no charges be brought against any individuals within the scope of the investigation."[11][156] Lynch was scheduled to speak about the matter before the House Judiciary Committee on July 12, 2016.[157]
Aftermath of FBI investigation[edit]
Allegations of perjury[edit]
The chairmen of the House Oversight and Government Reform and Judiciary Committees, U.S. Reps. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) and Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.), submitted a joint letter to the Justice Department requesting that it investigate Clinton for perjury. The letter provided four examples where Clinton allegedly lied under oath about her private email server, making statements that were “incompatible” with the conclusions of the FBI investigation.[158]
On August 18, 2016, USA Today reported that the House Judiciary Committee would hold a hearing in September where they would question the FBI on allegations that Clinton perjured herself. FBI Director James Comey was expected to be a witness.[159]
Discovery of additional emails[edit]
The FBI's investigation resulted in the discovery of 14,900 emails that were not previously disclosed. U.S. District Judge James E. Boasberg of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ordered the State Department to submit a new schedule for their release by September 23, 2016, expediting a previously planned rolling production set to begin mid-October as part of a FOIA-related lawsuit by Judicial Watch. “We’re pleased the court accelerated the State Department’s timing. We’re trying to work with the State Department here, but let’s be clear: They have slow-walked and stonewalled the release of these records,” said Tom Fitton, the president of Judicial Watch. State Department spokesman Mark Toner said, “State has not yet had the opportunity to complete a review of the documents to determine whether they are agency records or if they are duplicative of documents State has already produced through the Freedom of Information Act.”[160]
Judge William Dimitrouleas of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida also ordered the State Department to determine whether the 14,900 emails uncovered by the FBI included communications between Clinton and the White House in the days before and after the 2012 terrorist attack in Benghazi. It was given until September 13 to locate and release any emails it found as part of another lawsuit brought by Judicial Watch.[161]
The State Department announced in a hearing on September 6, 2016, that it had may have found approximately 30 emails which related to Benghazi. It requested that it have until the end of September to review and redact the documents where appropriate. Judge Amit P. Mehta of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia called on the State Department to explain the following week why it would take so long.[162]
FBI report and notes from Clinton's interview released[edit]
On September 2, 2016, the FBI released a 58-page report on its investigation into Clinton's private email server, including 11 pages of notes taken during the agency's interview with Clinton. "We are making these materials available to the public in the interest of transparency and in response to numerous Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests," the FBI National Press Office said in a statement.[163]
According to the report, Clinton "did not recall receiving any emails she thought should not be on an unclassified system. She "relied on State officials to use their judgment when emailing her and could not recall anyone raising concerns with her regarding the sensitivity of the information she received at her email address."[164] Clinton also said that when she received a document marked with a "C," she had not been certain that it was an indication of its classification.
Clinton was also asked about her knowledge of records management practices in the interview. Clinton "stated she received no instructions or direction regarding the preservation or production of records from State" when she was leaving office, although she suffered a concussion and blood clot in December 2012 and "could not recall every briefing she received" around that time.[164]
Additional investigation notes were released by the FBI on October 17, 2016. It was reported in one interview that Undersecretary of State for Management Patrick Kennedy attempted to have one of Clinton's emails declassified as part of a "quid pro quo" arrangement with an FBI official interested in increasing aid to station FBI agents overseas in sensitive areas. Another interview, however, indicated that it was the FBI employee who suggested that he would "look into the email matter" if Kennedy "would provide authority concerning the FBI's request to increase its personnel in Iraq." Both the FBI and the State Department denied that there was a "quid pro quo" arrangement.[165]
The FBI official in question, who was later identified as Brian McCauley, was interviewed by The Washington Post on October 18, 2016. McCauley said that although he had offered a favor for a favor to Kennedy in order to send two more bureau employees to Baghdad, Iraq, he declined once he realized that Kennedy's request related to a communication about Benghazi, Libya.[166]
Another FBI agent who worked under both Condoleezza Rice and Clinton said that Clinton “frequently and ‘blatantly’ disregarded" security protocols. The agent said that Clinton would arrive at diplomatic functions with her top adviser Huma Abedin rather than ambassadors "who were insulted and embarrassed by this breach of protocol.”[167] The FBI notes also revealed that former House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R) connected a Senate staffer and third party with Judicial Watch, a conservative watchdog group, on a project to determine if Clinton's email server had been hacked. Ultimately, Judicial Watch spent $32,000 searching for evidence online, eventually turning over materials found in the private investigation to the FBI.[168]
Ethical questions[edit]
Common Good VA, the political action committee of Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe (D), donated nearly $500,000 to the unsuccessful state Senate campaign of Jill McCabe, the wife of former FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe. Because McCabe helped oversee the Clinton email investigation and McAuliffe is a longtime Clinton ally, the ethics of the contribution were questioned.[169] "FBI officials said that after that meeting with the governor in Richmond on March 7, Mr. McCabe sought ethics advice from the bureau and followed it, avoiding involvement with public corruption cases in Virginia, and avoiding any campaign activity or events. Mr. McCabe’s supervision of the Clinton email case in 2016 wasn’t seen as a conflict or an ethics issue because his wife’s campaign was over by then and Mr. McAuliffe wasn’t part of the email probe, officials said," The Wall Street Journal reported on October 24, 2016.[169]
[edit]
On October 28, 2016, Comey announced in a letter to 16 members of Congress serving on oversight and intelligence committees that the FBI had found “emails that appear to be pertinent” to the agency's investigation of Clinton's private email server use in an unrelated case. "I agreed that the FBI should take appropriate investigative steps designed to allow investigators to review these emails to determine whether they contain classified information, as well as to assess their importance to our investigation," Comey wrote. The number, authors, and content of the emails were not disclosed.[12]
The New York Times later reported that the emails had been discovered on devices seized from Clinton aide Huma Abedin and her husband, former U.S. Rep. Anthony Weiner (R-N.Y.), as part of a separate investigation regarding inappropriate communications sent by Weiner to a minor.[170] Comey had not been briefed about the emails until several weeks after their discovery.[171]
Clinton held a press conference on October 28, 2016, where she said that more information should be disclosed. "Voting is already under way in our country. So the American people deserve to get the full and complete facts immediately. The director himself has said he doesn’t know whether the emails referenced in his letter are significant or not. I’m confident whatever they are will not change the conclusion reached in July. Therefore it’s imperative that the bureau explain this issue in question, whatever it is, without any delay," Clinton said.[172]
On October 30, 2016, The Washington Post reported that the FBI had obtained a warrant to search the computer of Weiner.[171]
Comey submitted another letter to members of Congress on November 6, 2016, notifying them that the review of the additional emails had been completed. "Since my letter, the FBI investigative team has been working around the clock to process and review a large volume of emails from a device obtained in connection with an unrelated criminal investigation. During that process, we reviewed all of the communications that were to or from Hillary Clinton while she was Secretary of State. Based on our review, we have not changed our conclusions that we expressed in July with respect to Secretary Clinton," Comey wrote.[173]
On August 23, 2018, Paul Sperry reported for RealClearInvestigations that only 3,000 of the 694,000 emails had been reviewed for classified or incriminating information, despite Comey's statement that all communications on Weiner's laptop had been reviewed. According to Sperry, that review produced additional evidence showing classified material had been improperly stored and transmitted on an unsecured device, but the FBI did not contact other U.S. intelligence agencies for further review.[174]
Inspector general's review of Comey's actions[edit]
Michael Horowitz, the Justice Department’s inspector general, announced on January 12, 2017, that he was opening an investigation into how Comey handled public disclosures about Clinton's private email server investigation following requests for an inquiry from members of Congress and the public.[175] Comey's July 2016 press conference where he called Clinton's conduct "extremely careless" and the letter he submitted to Congress in October 2016 about potentially new information in the investigation would be under review, along with whether the timing and audience of other disclosures were appropriate.[175][176]
President Trump fires Comey as the director of the FBI[edit]
On May 9, 2017, President Donald Trump, on the recommendations of Attorney General Jeff Sessions and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, fired Comey for his handling of the investigation into Clinton's private email server use.[177][178]
Rosenstein wrote in a memo, "[Comey] was wrong to usurp the Attorney General's authority on July 5, 2016, and announce his conclusion that the case should be closed without prosecution. It is not the function of the Director to make such an announcement. At most, the Director should have said the FBI had completed its investigation and presented its findings to federal prosecutors. ... Compounding the error, the Director ignored another longstanding principle: we do not hold press conferences to release derogatory information about the subject of a declined criminal investigation."[178]
In a letter to Comey, which referenced a separate FBI investigation into possible ties between Trump associates and Russia, Trump wrote, "While I greatly appreciate you informing me, on three separate occasions, that I am not under investigation, I nevertheless concur with the judgment of the Department of Justice that you are not able to effectively lead the bureau."[178]
IG releases report on Comey’s handling of Clinton email investigation[edit]
On June 14, 2018, Michael Horowitz, the Justice Department’s inspector general, released a 500-page report on James Comey’s handling of the investigation into Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server while serving as secretary of state. The report found that Comey and other FBI officials deviated from FBI and Justice Department procedures and made several errors in judgment in handling the investigation. Horowitz said in the report, “While we did not find that these decisions were the result of political bias on Comey’s part, we nevertheless concluded that by departing so clearly and dramatically from FBI and department norms, the decisions negatively impacted the perception of the FBI and the department as fair administrators of justice.”[179]
The report also stated that Horowitz found a “troubling lack of any direct, substantive communication” between Comey and Attorney General Loretta Lynch before Comey announced on July 5, 2016, that no charges would be filed against Clinton and before he notified Congress on October 28, 2016, that the FBI had found emails relevant to the agency's investigation of Clinton's private email server.[179]
The report stated, “We found it extraordinary that, in advance of two such consequential decisions, the FBI director decided that the best course of conduct was to not speak directly and substantively with the attorney general about how best to navigate those decisions.”[179]
Strzok and Page text messages[edit]
The report also addressed text messages sent between Peter Strzok, an investigator on both the Clinton email case and the investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential campaign, and FBI lawyer Lisa Page. On August 8, 2016, Page wrote, “[Trump’s] not ever going to become president, right? Right?!” Strzok replied, “No. No he won’t. We’ll stop it.”[180]
Horowitz said in the report, “We did not find documentary or testimonial evidence that improper considerations, including political bias, directly affected the specific investigative actions we reviewed.” He added, “The conduct by these employees cast a cloud over the entire FBI investigation.”[179]
Responses[edit]
- Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) said of the report, “It’s a damning indictment of former FBI Director Comey and the Department of Justice’s mishandling of the investigation.”[180]
- Reps. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) and Elijah Cummings (D-Md.) said in a joint statement, “The stark conclusion we draw after reviewing this report is that the FBI’s actions helped Donald Trump become President. As we warned before the election, Director Comey had a double-standard: he spoke publicly about the Clinton investigation while keeping secret from the American people the investigation of Donald Trump and Russia.”[180]
- Chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.): “The report also conclusively shows an alarming and destructive level of animus displayed by top officials at the FBI. Peter Strzok’s manifest bias trending toward animus casts a pall on this investigation. ... This report confirms investigative decisions made by the FBI during the pendency of this investigation were unprecedented and deviated from traditional investigative procedures in favor of a much more permissive and voluntary approach. This is not the way normal investigations are run. Voluntariness and consent in the former were replaced with search warrants, subpoenas, and other compulsory processes in the latter. Many of the investigators and supervisors were the same in both investigations but the investigatory tactics were not.”[181]
Impact on Clinton's 2016 presidential campaign[edit]
In September 2015, Clinton said that she did not believe that the inquiries into her private email server had damaged her campaign. “It's a distraction, certainly. But it hasn't in any way affected the plan for our campaign, the efforts we're making to organize here in Iowa and elsewhere in the country. And I still feel very confident about the organization and the message that my campaign is putting out,” Clinton said.[182] As Clinton's poll numbers declined during this period and the FBI launched its own investigation into Clinton's server, some political commentators suggested that Clinton's campaign was compromised by the issue.[183][184]
Public opinion polls[edit]
Prior to March 2015, when Clinton's private email server was first reported in The New York Times, Clinton's favorability hovered between 55 and 59 percent, according to national polls sponsored by CNN. Immediately after the news broke, Clinton's numbers dipped slightly to 53 percent.[185] Subsequent polls by Langer Research for ABC News and The Washington Post saw Clinton's numbers descend to 52 percent in July 2015 and 45 percent in August 2015.[186] September 2015 polls by Quinnipiac University and Fox News measured her favorability rating at 41 percent and 38 percent, respectively.[187][188]
Clinton's favorability ratings had a substantial partisan gap as of September 2015. For example, the Quinnipiac University national poll conducted in September 2015 saw Clinton's favorable rating among Democrats at 84 percent. In comparison, 90 percent of Republicans had an unfavorable opinion of Clinton in the same poll.[187]
Several polls have also measured how trustworthy voters find Clinton. In a July 2015 Quinnipiac University national poll, 57 percent of respondents said Clinton was "not honest or trustworthy.[189] In the swing states of Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania, 60 percent of respondents did not find Clinton to be honest and trustworthy, according to another Quinnipiac poll in August 2015.[190]
When directly asked to offer an opinion on the inquiries into Clinton's private email server, 46 percent of U.S. voters said in August 2015 that Clinton should suspend her campaign until the issue was settled. A nearly equal number—44 percent—said she should not.[191]
Although the FBI concluded its investigation and Clinton secured the Democratic presidential nomination in the year since, Clinton's poll numbers on honesty and trustworthiness have not shifted. In a USA Today/Suffolk University national poll released on September 8, 2016, only 31.3 percent of voters said that she was "honest and trustworthy." Trump, however, registered an even lower rating on this question with 30.6 percent of respondents saying the same.[192] When voters were asked to compare the two candidates' honesty in a poll released by CNN on September 6, 2016, however, 50 percent of respondents said Trump was "more honest and trustworthy" than Clinton. Only 35 percent said the reverse.[193]
Comments from the Obama administration[edit]
In an interview on CBS' "60 Minutes" in October 2015, President Barack Obama called Clinton's use of a private email server "a mistake that she has acknowledged."[194] He noted that he had not been aware of the arrangement at the time, but did not believe "it posed a national security problem. He added, “The fact that for the last three months this is all that's been spoken about is an indication that we're in presidential political season."[194]
Comments from other presidential candidates during the primaries[edit]
Democrats[edit]
Although Clinton's Democratic competitors avoided making judgments on the legality of Clinton's private email server use, some noted its impact on her presidential campaign and voter perception. On August 25, 2015, Lincoln Chafee suggested that Clinton was "obviously" politically vulnerable because of the inquiries into her private email server. “It’s a huge issue. It just is, and you see it in the news and reflected in the polls. Voters want choices, and that’s what we should have," Chafee said, adding, "your character, your past record, your vision for the future" are what voters would consider.[195]
Martin O'Malley said in August 2015 that journalists had "legitimate" questions to ask Clinton and her lawyers, but that he planned to focus instead on ideas and policies in his own campaign.[196]
Bernie Sanders took a similar approach in an interview with MSNBC's Andrea Mitchell on August 31, 2015. He declined to say whether Clinton compromised national security. "Well, there is a process going on now. We will learn more about it. But this campaign that I am running, let me reiterate, is not against Hillary Clinton or anybody else," said Sanders.[197]
At the first Democratic presidential debate on October 13, 2015, moderator Anderson Cooper asked Sanders to comment on the email investigation. Sanders responded, "Let me say - let me say something that may not be great politics. But I think the secretary is right, and that is that the American people are sick and tired of hearing about your damn e-mails."[198] Cooper then turned to O'Malley who said, "I believe that now that we're finally having debates, Anderson, that we don't have to be defined by the email scandal, and how long - what the FBI's asking about. Instead, we can talk about affordable college, making college debt free, and all the issues."[198]
Republicans[edit]
The Republican presidential field has generally been critical of Clinton's conduct, with some candidates calling her actions "criminal."
Carly Fiorina has been one of Clinton's most vocal critics. On July 27, 2015, Fiorina suggested that Clinton’s private email server usage demonstrated Clinton's lack of understanding of technology or cybersecurity, two subjects the “next president must understand.”[199] The following month, in an interview with NBC’s Chuck Todd, Fiorina said that Clinton had "lied about some key things" like "her emails" and "her server."[200]
| Fiorina discusses Clinton's private email server in August 2015 on Fox Business. |
In September 2015, Fiorina expressed skepticism that Clinton was ignorant of how her work-related emails should have been handled. Speaking about Clinton’s choice to employ Bryan Pagliano, a State Department staffer, to work on her private email server, Fiorina added, “[T]hat actually takes a lot of work and lot of effort. And so I don't think it's plausible for her to say, 'Oh, I wasn't paying any attention.' She clearly was paying attention.”[201]
George Pataki expressed similar doubts that Clinton was unaware of the consequences of using a private email server. He tweeted on July 27, 2015, “Every ‘grandmother with two eyes and a brain’ knows storing sensitive classified information on a home server is dangerous @HillaryClinton.”[202][203]
In an interview on MSNBC on August 24, 2015, Chris Christie said Clinton "deserves to be pounded" for her use of a private email server. "The fact is she doesn’t think she’s accountable to the American people because she won’t answer questions," he added.[204] On September 13, 2015, Christie suggested that one issue with Clinton's conduct was how she handled herself after the private email server was discovered. He said, “What really matters, as Hillary Clinton is finding out, is how you react to a crisis. Not that there never will be any crises, but how you react to it. When we had a crisis, the next day I went out and took questions for an hour and 15 minutes, no holds barred. Let’s wait to see if Mrs. Clinton every does one-fifth of that on her crisis.”[205]
Calling himself “fluent in Clinton-speak" during the Voters First Forum on August 3, 2015, Lindsey Graham suggested that the Clintons were untrustworthy. “When Bill says he didn't have sex with that woman, he did. When [Hillary] says, 'I'll tell you about building the pipeline when I get to be president,' it means she won't. And when she tells us, 'Trust me, you have all the emails you need,' we haven't even scratched the surface,” Graham said.[206]
In July 2015, Rand Paul it was the Obama administration that was interested in her conduct and not “Republicans making a political point.” Paul added, “Even she knew there was a rule. They actually admonished one of her ambassadors because he wasn't using the proper server. I don't understand how she can skate by and act as if she wasn't aware of the law.” Paul also said that the “Clintons think they live above the law. They think they live differently than all the rest of America, and I think this is going to come back to bite her, and it already is.”[207][208]
In July 2015, Donald Trump said Clinton's conduct was "criminal" and "far worse" than what Gen. David Petraeus was prosecuted for.[209]
See also[edit]
- Hillary Clinton
- Hillary Clinton presidential campaign, 2016
- 2012 Benghazi attack overview
- Freedom of Information Act
Footnotes[edit]
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 The Wall Street Journal, "Timeline: Hillary Clinton’s Email Chain," March 10, 2015
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 Hillary for America, "Updated: The Facts About Hillary Clinton’s Emails," accessed September 16, 2015
- ↑ National Review, "Yes, Hillary Clinton Broke the Law," March 3, 2015
- ↑ The New York Times, "Judge Says Hillary Clinton Didn’t Follow Government Email Policies," August 21, 2015
- ↑ Wired, "Why Clinton’s Private Email Server Was Such a Security Fail," March 4, 2015
- ↑ 6.0 6.1 6.2 Politico, "Feds move to consolidate lawsuits over Hillary Clinton emails," September 1, 2015
- ↑ CNN, "Benghazi attack timeline," August 6, 2013
- ↑ The Washington Post, "FBI looking into the security of Hillary Clinton’s private e-mail setup," August 4, 2015
- ↑ 9.0 9.1 9.2 9.3 9.4 Office of Inspector General, "Evaluation of Email Records Management and Cybersecurity Requirements," accessed May 26, 2016
- ↑ 10.0 10.1 10.2 Federal Bureau of Investigation, "Statement by FBI Director James B. Comey on the Investigation of Secretary Hillary Clinton’s Use of a Personal E-Mail System ," July 5, 2016
- ↑ 11.0 11.1 U.S. Department of Justice, "Statement from Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch Regarding State Department Email Investigation," July 6, 2016
- ↑ 12.0 12.1 NBC News, "FBI to Re-Open Investigation Into Hillary Clinton's Email Server," October 28, 2016
- ↑ NPR, "FBI Affirms July Decision Not To Charge Clinton, After Review Of Weiner Emails," November 6, 2016
- ↑ NPR, "Fact Check: Hillary Clinton, Those Emails And The Law," April 2, 2015
- ↑ GPO, "§ 3101. Records management by agency heads; general duties," accessed September 17, 2015
- ↑ 16.0 16.1 16.2 16.3 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
- ↑ National Review, "Yes, What Hillary Did Was Illegal—and Has Been for 20 Years," March 5, 2015
- ↑ HeinOnline, "60 Fed. Reg. 44641 1995," accessed September 23, 2015
- ↑ GPO.gov, "Electronic Freedom of Information Act Amendments of 1996," accessed September 23, 2015
- ↑ FOIA.gov, "Frequently Asked Questions," September 25, 2015
- ↑ GPO.gov, "Title 18–Crimes and Criminal Procedure," accessed September 25, 2015
- ↑ Archives.gov, "NARA Bulletin 2013-03," September 9, 2013
- ↑ Wall Street Journal, "Hillary Clinton’s Personal Email Use Came Before Recent Rule Changes," March 3, 2015
- ↑ National Archives, "National Archives Welcomes Presidential and Federal Records Act Amendments of 2014," December 1, 2014
- ↑ Congress.gov, "H.R.1233 - Presidential and Federal Records Act Amendments of 2014," accessed October 2, 2015
- ↑ TIME, "The Legal Question Over Hillary Clinton’s Secret Emails," July 29, 2015
- ↑ Associated Press, "Legal experts see no criminal trouble for Clinton thus far," August 31, 2015
- ↑ USA Today, "Petraeus prosecutor: Clinton committed no crime," August 31, 2015
- ↑ Business Insider, "Dick Cheney is strafing Hillary Clinton's 'very, very serious' email scandal," September 1, 2015
- ↑ Politico, "Past cases suggest Hillary won’t be indicted," April 11, 2016
- ↑ The Washington Post, "Hillary Clinton’s e-mails: a timeline of actions and regulations," March 10, 2015
- ↑ The New York Times, "Membership in Clinton’s Email Domain Is Remembered as a Mark of Status," March 4, 2015
- ↑ 33.0 33.1 The Washington Post, "FBI looking into the security of Hillary Clinton’s private e-mail setup," August 4, 2015
- ↑ 34.0 34.1 CBS News, "Is there usable info in Clinton's email server," August 13, 2015
- ↑ 35.0 35.1 CNN, "Hillary Clinton deleted all email from personal server," March 28, 2015
- ↑ The Washington Post, "Tech company: no indication that Clinton's email server was 'wiped'," September 12, 2015
- ↑ The Washington Post, "FBI probe of Clinton e-mail expands to second data company," October 7, 2015
- ↑ Associated Press, "Clinton subject to hack attempts from China, Korea, Germany," October 7, 2015
- ↑ The Washington Post, "Hacked e-mails indicate that Hillary Clinton used a domain registered the day of her Senate hearings," March 2, 2015
- ↑ Talking Points Memo, "Timeline: Key Dates in the Evolution of Hillary's Email Problems," March 11, 2015
- ↑ Gawker, "Hacked Emails Show Hillary Clinton Was Receiving Advice at a Private Email Account From Banned, Obama-Hating Former Staffer," September 20, 2013
- ↑ 42.0 42.1 Washington Post, "State Department’s account of e-mail request differs from Clinton’s," September 22, 2015
- ↑ The New York Times, "Hillary Clinton Used Personal Email Account at State Dept., Possibly Breaking Rules," March 2, 2015
- ↑ 44.0 44.1 44.2 TIME, "Transcript: Everything Hillary Clinton Said on the Email Controversy," March 10, 2015
- ↑ 45.0 45.1 ABC News, "Full Transcript: ABC's David Muir Interviews Hillary Clinton," September 8, 2015
- ↑ Huffington Post, "Hillary Clinton Denies Private Email Allegations In New Interview," September 4, 2015
- ↑ CNN Politics, "Hillary Clinton on emails: 'I'm sorry,'" September 9, 2015
- ↑ Washington Post, "Hillary Clinton apologizes for e-mail system: ‘I take responsibility,’" September 8, 2015
- ↑ NPR, "Some Clinton Emails Were Retroactively Classified," May 22, 2015
- ↑ 50.0 50.1 50.2 CNN, "First round of Hillary Clinton State Department emails released," May 26, 2015
- ↑ Leopold v. State Department, No. 1:15-cv-00123 (RC) (D.D.C. May 27, 2015)
- ↑ U.S. News & World Report, "Read the Second Batch of Hillary Clinton's Released Emails," July 1, 2015
- ↑ 53.0 53.1 Politico, "New Clinton emails show expansive role of Sidney Blumenthal," June 30, 2015
- ↑ CNN, "Clinton emails: Obama aides knew of private address," July 1, 2015
- ↑ NBC News, "Third Round of Hillary Clinton Emails Released," July 31, 2015
- ↑ 56.0 56.1 NBC News, "Third Round of Hillary Clinton Emails Released," July 31, 2015
- ↑ Wall Street Journal, "Largest Batch to Date of Hillary Clinton Emails Released by State Department," September 1, 2015
- ↑ Reuters, "Hillary Clinton aides worried about private email use in 2011," September 30, 2015
- ↑ The Hill, "State Department releases thousands of new Clinton emails," September 30, 2015
- ↑ 60.0 60.1 CBS News, "Thousands of pages of Hillary Clinton's emails released," October 30, 2015
- ↑ Politico, "The 13 must-read Clinton emails," October 30, 2015
- ↑ 62.0 62.1 The New York Times, "White House Aims to Stop Release of Obama-Clinton Emails," October 30, 2015
- ↑ Politico, "State Dept., intel watchdog tangle over Clinton emails," November 30, 2015
- ↑ Politico, "The 15 must-read Clinton emails," November 30, 2015
- ↑ NBC News, "State Department Releases Largest Batch Yet of Clinton Emails," November 30, 2015
- ↑ ABC News, "State Department Falls Short on New Batch of Clinton Emails," December 31, 2015
- ↑ 67.0 67.1 Politico, "The 8 must-read Hillary Clinton emails," January 8, 2016
- ↑ 68.0 68.1 The Hill, "State dumps new batch of Clinton emails late Friday," January 29, 2016
- ↑ 69.0 69.1 The New York Times, "More Hillary Clinton Emails Released, Including 3 Now ‘Secret,'" February 13, 2016
- ↑ Politico, "More Hillary Clinton emails released on eve of Nevada caucuses," February 19, 2016
- ↑ CBS News, "Second-to-last batch of Hillary Clinton's emails released," February 27, 2016
- ↑ VICE News, "Hours Before South Carolina Primary, 1,500 Pages of Hillary Clinton Emails Are Released," February 26, 2016
- ↑ The Washington Post, "State Department releases final batch of Clinton emails," February 29, 2016
- ↑ NBC News, "State Department Releases Final Batch of Hillary Clinton's Emails," March 1, 2016
- ↑ Reuters, "State Department says halts review of Clinton emails at FBI request," April 2, 2016
- ↑ 76.0 76.1 76.2 The New York Times, "Classified Data Found in Personal Email of Colin Powell and Aides to Condoleezza Rice," February 4, 2016
- ↑ Politico, "State Dept. watchdog: Clinton violated email rules," May 25, 2016
- ↑ 78.0 78.1 ABC News, "Hillary Clinton Doubles Down on Email Scandal, Saying 'It Was Allowed,'" May 26, 2016
- ↑ Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source.
- ↑ CNN, "State Department report slams Clinton email use," May 25, 2016
- ↑ Republican National Committee, "RNC Statement On State Dept. IG Report On Clinton’s Emails," May 25, 2016
- ↑ The Hill, "Trump: Scandal might force Clinton out of race," May 25, 2016
- ↑ Politico, "Sanders camp refuses to pounce on Clinton State IG report," May 25, 2016
- ↑ Document Cloud, "Jason Leopold v. Department of State, Complaint," January 25, 2015
- ↑ Vice, "Judge Orders State Department to Release Clinton Emails on Rolling Basis," May 19, 2015
- ↑ CNN, "Federal judge orders next batch of Clinton emails due June 30," May 27, 2015
- ↑ Cite error: Invalid
<ref>tag; no text was provided for refs namedRCCourtOrder - ↑ The Washington Times, "State Department seeks to consolidate Hillary Clinton email cases in court," September 3, 2015
- ↑ Wall Street Journal, "Judge Uneasy With Government’s Push to Lump Clinton Email Lawsuits," September 3, 2015
- ↑ The Wall Street Journal, "Inspector General Faults State Department’s Handling of Hillary Clinton’s Records," January 7, 2016
- ↑ 91.0 91.1 CNN, "Clinton emails may be delayed due to snow, State Dept. tells federal judge," January 22, 2016
- ↑ Politico, "Judge sets N.H. primary-day hearing on Hillary Clinton email suit," February 1, 2016
- ↑ The Huffington Post, "Judge Handling Clinton Email Case Fumes Over State Department Delays," February 9, 2016
- ↑ The Daily Beast, "State Department: Don’t Ask Hillary Aides About Classified Info in Lawsuit," April 6, 2016
- ↑ NBC News, "Judge: It 'May Be Necessary' to Depose Hillary Clinton in Email Case," May 4, 2016
- ↑ Politico, "Judge: Video of Clinton aides' depositions to be kept secret," May 26, 2015
- ↑ The New York Times, "Hillary Clinton Aide Says Little Thought Was Given to Potential Issues Over Private Email," May 31, 2016
- ↑ Judicial Watch, "Transcript of Cheryl D. Mills, Esq.," May 27, 2016
- ↑ Politico, "Clinton tech aide plans to take the Fifth at deposition," June 1, 2016
- ↑ U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of State - Memorandum and order, August 8, 2017
- ↑ U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, Judicial Watch et al. v. Rex W. Tillerson et al., November 9, 2017
- ↑ House Select Committee on Benghazi, "About," accessed October 1, 2015
- ↑ House Select Committee on Benghazi, "Clinton Subpoena," March 4, 2015
- ↑ CNN, "CNN Exclusive: Hillary Clinton's first national interview of 2016 Race," July 7, 2015
- ↑ House Select Committee on Benghazi, "Select Committee on Benghazi Releases Clinton Subpoena," July 8, 2015
- ↑ New York Daily News, "Subpoena of Hillary Clinton's Benghazi emails released after she said she 'never had' one," July 8, 2015
- ↑ NBC News, "Ex-Hillary Clinton Staffer Who Set Up Email Server Plans to Plead the Fifth," September 3, 2015
- ↑ ABC News, "Former Hillary Clinton Staffer Comes to Congress to Plead the Fifth," September 10, 2015
- ↑ Select Committee on Benghazi, "Cummings Statement on Benghazi Committee’s Political Theater," September 10, 2015
- ↑ The New York Times, "Cheryl Mills, Adviser to Hillary Clinton, Testifies on Benghazi and Email Practices," September 3, 2015
- ↑ 111.0 111.1 Politico, "Clinton campaign blasts McCarthy for Benghazi panel remarks," September 30, 2015
- ↑ Politico, "McCarthy's Benghazi gift to team Hillary," October 1, 2015
- ↑ Business Insider, "A visibly angry Hillary Clinton just went off on Republicans for their Benghazi investigation," October 5, 2015
- ↑ ABC News, "Hillary Clinton Uses McCarthy's Benghazi Comments in First National TV Ad," October 5, 2015
- ↑ YouTube, "Admit | Hillary Clinton," October 4, 2015
- ↑ House Select Committee on Benghazi, "Letter from Tred Gowdy to Elijah Cummings," October 7, 2015
- ↑ Washington Examiner, "Cummings: 'Gowdy has had a terrible week'," October 8, 2015
- ↑ The Wall Street Journal, "Former Benghazi Committee Staffer Alleges Probe Unfairly Focused on Hillary Clinton," October 11, 2015
- ↑ The New York Times, "Suit Over Firing Exposes Strife Within Benghazi Panel," October 10, 2015
- ↑ The Huffington Post, "Second GOP Congressman Admits Benghazi Committee Is All About Hillary Clinton," October 14, 2015
- ↑ The Washington Post, "Full text: Clinton testifies before House committee on Benghazi," October 22, 2015
- ↑ NBC News, "Five Takeaways From Clinton's Benghazi Testimony," October 22, 2015
- ↑ Politico, "The 13 top moments from Clinton's Benghazi testimony," October 22, 2015
- ↑ 124.0 124.1 House Select Committee on Benghazi, "Majority Report," June 28, 2016
- ↑ The New York Times, "House Benghazi Report Finds No New Evidence of Wrongdoing by Hillary Clinton," June 28, 2016
- ↑ The Hill, "Clinton: ‘It’s time to move on’ from Benghazi," June 28, 2016
- ↑ House Select Committee on Benghazi, "Report of the Democratic Members," accessed June 27, 2016
- ↑ CNN, "Democrats release Benghazi report," June 27, 2016
- ↑ The New York Times, "Inquiry Sought in Hillary Clinton’s Use of Email," July 23, 2015
- ↑ Politico, "New York Times alters Clinton email story," July 24, 2015
- ↑ Politico, "New York Times alters Clinton email story," July 24, 2015
- ↑ The Washington Post, "FBI looking into the security of Hillary Clinton’s private e-mail setup," August 4, 2015
- ↑ The New York Times, "F.B.I. Tracking Path of Classified Email From State Dept. to Hillary Clinton," August 14, 2015
- ↑ The Washington Post, "Hillary Clinton agrees to provide private e-mail server to FBI," August 11, 2015
- ↑ Politico, "Hillary Clinton fights back on classified emails," August 20, 2015
- ↑ Politico, "Judge says Hillary Clinton's private emails violated policy," August 20, 2015
- ↑ The Washington Times, "Court says Hillary Clinton emails broke ‘government policy’," August 20, 2015
- ↑ Washington Times, "FBI refuses to cooperate in Hillary Clinton email server probe," September 21, 2015
- ↑ Bloomberg, "FBI Said to Recover Personal E-Mails From Hillary Clinton Server," September 22, 2015
- ↑ FOX News, "FBI's Clinton probe expands to public corruption track," January 11, 2016
- ↑ MSNBC, "FBI formally confirms its investigation of Hillary Clinton’s email server," February 8, 2016
- ↑ The Washington Post, "Justice Dept. grants immunity to staffer who set up Clinton email server," March 2, 2016
- ↑ The Hill, "Clinton 'delighted' State Dept. staffer cooperating in email probe," March 6, 2016
- ↑ The Los Angeles Times, "Clinton email probe enters new phase as FBI interviews loom," March 27, 2016
- ↑ The Washington Post, "There are dozens of FBI agents involved in the Hillary Clinton email investigation," March 28, 2016
- ↑ Politico, "Official: FBI team on Clinton email probe not near 150," March 28, 2016
- ↑ NBC News, "Fed Source: About 12 FBI Agents Working on Clinton Email Inquiry," March 30, 2016
- ↑ Politico, "Clinton aides unite on FBI legal strategy," April 1, 2016
- ↑ NBC News, "FBI Director: Democratic Convention Not a Deadline in Clinton Email Investigation," April 21, 2016
- ↑ 150.0 150.1 The New York Times, "Loretta Lynch to Accept F.B.I. Recommendations in Clinton Email Inquiry," July 1, 2016
- ↑ CNN, "Bill Clinton meeting causes headaches for Hillary," June 30, 2016
- ↑ The New York Times, "F.B.I. Interviews Hillary Clinton Over Private Email Server," July 2, 2016
- ↑ CNN, "Republicans hit Comey over Clinton email probe, say issue isn't over," July 7, 2016
- ↑ Reuters, "FBI chief says his staff would face discipline for handling emails the way Clinton did," July 7, 2016
- ↑ CNBC, "Chaffetz to FBI's Comey: Expect a request to probe if Clinton lied under oath," July 7, 2016
- ↑ The New York Times, "F.B.I. Chief to Explain Recommendation on Hillary Clinton Before Congress," July 6, 2016
- ↑ House Judiciary Committee, "Oversight of the Department of Justice," accessed July 8, 2016
- ↑ Roll Call, "House Panels Lay Out Case That Clinton Perjured Herself," August 15, 2016
- ↑ USA Today, "House panel to probe FBI about whether Clinton perjured herself to Congress," August 19, 2016
- ↑ The Washington Post, "FBI uncovers 14,900 more documents in Clinton email probe," August 22, 2016
- ↑ Reuters, "Judge orders search of new Clinton emails for release by September 13," August 26, 2016
- ↑ The Hill, "FBI recovers 30 deleted Clinton emails involving Benghazi attack," August 30, 2016
- ↑ FBI, "FBI Releases Documents in Hillary Clinton E-Mail Investigation," September 2, 2016
- ↑ 164.0 164.1 FBI, "Hillary R. Clinton Part 02 of 02," accessed September 7, 2016
- ↑ CNN, "State Department official sought FBI declassification of Clinton email," October 17, 2016
- ↑ The Washington Post, "‘I need a favor’: FBI official at center of alleged Clinton email ‘quid pro quo’ speaks out," October 18, 2016
- ↑ CBS News, "FBI documents: Former agent complained Hillary Clinton flouted protocol while secretary," October 17, 2016
- ↑ The Hill, "Gingrich played previously undisclosed role in probing Clinton server," October 17, 2016
- ↑ 169.0 169.1 The Wall Street Journal, "Clinton Ally Aided Campaign of FBI Official’s Wife," October 24, 2015
- ↑ The New York Times, "New Emails in Clinton Case Came From Devices Once Used by Anthony Weiner," October 28, 2016
- ↑ 171.0 171.1 The Washington Post, "FBI has obtained warrant to search newly discovered emails potentially relevant to Clinton probe," October 30, 2016
- ↑ The Atlantic, "The FBI Investigates More Emails Related to Clinton," October 28, 2016
- ↑ USA Today, "Read the full text of James Comey’s letter on the new Clinton emails," October 6, 2016
- ↑ RealClearInvestigations, "Despite Comey Assurances, Vast Bulk of Weiner Laptop Emails Were Never Examined," August 23, 2018
- ↑ 175.0 175.1 The New York Times, "Comey Letter on Clinton Email Is Subject of Justice Dept. Inquiry," January 12, 2017
- ↑ CNN, "FBI, Justice Department to be investigated over Clinton probe," January 12, 2017
- ↑ The New York Times, "F.B.I. Director James Comey Is Fired by Trump," May 9, 2017
- ↑ 178.0 178.1 178.2 The New York Times, "White House Announces Firing of James Comey," May 9, 2017
- ↑ 179.0 179.1 179.2 179.3 Bloomberg, "Comey Broke From FBI Procedures in Clinton Probe, Watchdog Finds," June 14, 2018
- ↑ 180.0 180.1 180.2 The Washington Post, "IG report criticizes Comey’s handling of Clinton probe, includes anti-Trump exchanges among FBI personnel," June 14, 2018
- ↑ The Hill, "Live coverage: IG releases watchdog report on FBI, Clinton probe," June 14, 2018
- ↑ The Chicago Tribune, "Clinton says no email apology: 'What I did was allowed'," September 7, 2015
- ↑ The New York Times, "Hillary Clinton, Citing Her ‘Mistake,’ Apologizes for Private Email," September 8, 2015
- ↑ RealClearPolitics, "Andrea Mitchell: Media Underestimated Impact Of Hillary Clinton's Private Email Server," July 27, 2015
- ↑ CNN, "March 13-15, 2015, Poll," March 16, 2015
- ↑ Langer Research, "Clinton Goes Under Water; Trump Polarization Grows," September 2, 2015
- ↑ 187.0 187.1 Quinnipiac University, "Biden, Carson Are Strongest In General Election, Quinnipiac University National Poll Finds; Fiorina Thumps Trump In Debate; Ties Clinton In Matchup," September 24, 2015
- ↑ Fox News, "Fox News Poll: Clinton popularity drops, Carson gets high marks," September 27, 2015
- ↑ Quinnipiac University, "Trump Tops Republican Pack By Wide Margin, Quinnipiac University National Poll Finds; But Dems Trump Trump In General Election," July 30, 2015
- ↑ Quinnipiac University, "Biden Tops Trump In Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Quinnipiac University Swing State Poll Finds," August 20, 2015
- ↑ Rasmussen Reports, "Should Hillary Clinton Suspend Her Campaign," August 25, 2015
- ↑ Suffolk University, "Complete Marginals," September 8, 2016
- ↑ CNN, "Post-Labor Day Poll," September 6, 2016
- ↑ 194.0 194.1 The Los Angeles Times, "Obama defends Clinton over private email server, blames controversy on politics," October 11, 2015
- ↑ The Washington Free Beacon, "Chafee: Clinton ‘Obviously’ Vulnerable Over Private Email Scandal," August 25, 2015
- ↑ CBS News, "O'Malley: 'Legitimate' questions surround Clinton's email," August 16, 2015
- ↑ Daily Caller, "Sanders Won’t Take Stance On Permitting A Cabinet Secretary To Use A Private Email System," August 31, 2015
- ↑ 198.0 198.1 CNN, "CNN Democratic Debate – Full Transcript," October 13, 2015
- ↑ The Washington Times, "Carly Fiorina continues painting Hillary Clinton as an incompetent," July 27, 2015
- ↑ NBC News, "Carly Fiorina: I Owe Hillary 'A Debt of Gratitude,' But She's 'Lied'," August 23, 2015
- ↑ Politico, "Fiorina: 'Boo hoo, Mrs. Clinton'," September 7, 2015
- ↑ New York Daily News, "George Pataki takes shot at Hillary Clinton over private email server," July 27, 2015
- ↑ YouTube, "Stand for Reality," July 26, 2015
- ↑ MSNBC, "Christie on emails: Clinton giving 'typical response'," August 24, 2015
- ↑ The Washington Times, "Chris Christie: I handled my crisis better than Hillary Clinton is handling hers," September 13, 2015
- ↑ CBS News, "GOP candidates (except Donald Trump) appear at New Hampshire forum," August 4, 2015
- ↑ CBS News, "Rand Paul: 'Clintons think they live above the law'," July 26, 2015
- ↑ FOX News, "Impact of Clinton email controversy, Planned Parenthood on 2016; Rand Paul tries to reignite his campaign," July 26, 2015
- ↑ Politico, "Trump: Clinton's private email practice 'criminal'," July 26, 2015
EncycloReader
is supported by the 
KSF