Skip to content

Get Judicial Watch Updates!


Judicial Watch • Deputy Director McCabe Office of Professional Responsibility Investigation

Deputy Director McCabe Office of Professional Responsibility Investigation

Deputy Director McCabe Office of Professional Responsibility Investigation

Page 1: Deputy Director McCabe Office of Professional Responsibility Investigation

Donate now to keep these documents public!

See Generated Text   ∨

Autogenerated text from PDF

FOIPA Request No.: 1399934-000
CivilAction No. 18-cv-1766
Total Withheld Page(s) 181
Bates Page Reference
18-cv-01766-9 18-cv-01766-11
18-cv-01766-369 18-cv-01766-521
Reason for Withholding
(i.e., exemptions with coded rationale, duplicate, sealed
order comt, etc.)
(b)(6)-l (b)(7)(C)-l
(b)(6)-l (b)(7)(C)-l
Direct Refe1rnl Deprutment Justice/ Office Inspector
Direct Refe1rnl Deprutment Justice/ Office Inspector
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx leted Page Duplication Fee
For this Page
DAlE 04-05-2018
------., NSICG 1...
Critical Case
BUFILE#: 26:_3_D--H
CASE SUPER VISOR: =-Al-4.V_Cd_,__ _----1
DATE REPORTED: 3/14/2018
Directors Office
released sensitive information the Wall Street Journal and lacked
candor not under oath and under oath when questioned about violation Offense Codes 4.10 (Unauthorized Disclosure -:Sensitive Information); 2.5 (Lack Candor/Lying Oath); and
2.6 (Lack Candor/Lying Under Oath).
2.5, 2.6, 4.10 ~A-~.~1 ...____
(:)3lt-t .,,..,:-.
Wednesday, March 14, 2018 Page
FBI 18-cv-01766-1
OaA- l(L( (Z.5, Z,lt, -rr----irr----:--
___...,:. .-. -...__ :.--....-. .:.. -=-..
763 ,/1/;~DL---._
_.... ----.-....... ... ,!,.. ...
... ..... .... ...
.... --.... .....,,._ .............
----- ---
FBI 18-cv-01766-2
1;,:;:;: ___
(INSD) (FBI) b?c
DATE 04-05-2018
scon (INSD) (FBI)
Wedne sday, March :4, 2018 2:55
Joo) (FBI)
RE: new case --- UNCLASSIRED
OG/OOJ Review:
Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
----------------------------------------------- ------Copy. File jacket being prepared. Thanks.
Scott Hinckley
Inspection Division
Chief Internal lnvestrtions Section
!{DO) (FBI)
Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 201? lr:16
Subject: new case --- UNCLASSIFIED
1(00) (FBl1
Classification: UNCJ.,ASSIFIED
-----------------------------------------------------Scott; discussed, please open -new 263 number based the OIGs report, dated February 20_
18, titled Report
Investigation Certain Allegations Relating Former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe The report alleges that
Dep1,.1ty Director McCabe lacked candor under oath and not under oath whe.n questioned regarding disclosures the
Wall Street Journal,.in violation FBI Offense Codes 2.6 and 2.5. Additionally, the report alleges that Deputy Director
McCabe released sensitive information the Wall Street Jo_urnal, violation FBI Offense Code 4.10. OPR received the OIG report-on February 28, 2018.
Thank you. b7C
FBI 18.-cv-01766-3
.Unit Chief, AU-11
Office Pcafossiaoal 8esf nsibility
Classif cation: UNCLASSIFIED
Classif.i cation: UNCLASSIFIED
_FBJ 18-cv-01766-4
lEaa.... -----,
DATE 04- 0~- 2018
ADJ. EOD: 07/.07/1996 AD]. AGENT EOD: /0.7 /1996
------+ .PFll PROP
-187, 000
IL.-_ _____. SQUAD:
SERIES 1811:
PF2 PF3 PF4 PF5 .PF6 PF? PF8 PF9 PF10
SCD! .EDUC SKILL INSERV MLTY LANG !TRAING! TRNSFR -----+ ------+------+-------+------- +----- .+------+------+--------+
PF12 PF13 Pfl4 PF15 PF16 PF17 PF18. PF19 PF20
FBI 18-cv-01766-5
INSPE3116i2011 ----
R~ferred !DIVISION
ASSIGNl;D Tof :b7C
OIG Number(s) _..,
Type Reporting Division [~----0~~-]
:.=~~~-~~J .Div A~are Date :02/21 i2ci1T1
Complaint Document
!.~:~~!~-:.....-. --.-~..J
Date 03/09/2017
Untimely Reporting
File Name
~cit ---
... _,. --- --- ---
___ ___
Occurrence Dater --]-
Occurrence Location
,__, ----- ------
C~untry !!)SA_ ~---- ...-.--.. ..- _._ _l.,
--- _____
Assistant Director)
Assistant Director)
Categories for Tracking.Purposes Only Unauthorized Disclosure Serisitive Information
b7C -------- -~- ----- -------------- --- ---- --- --------.. ...-_ ...... ---- ---1
lOPA was electronically contacted byj
!regarding media leak involving statemenf overheard early February
)2017, allegedly made FBI EM. Specifically, the alleged comments were made DOA McCabe and pertained General Michael
,Flynn and the POTUS. ......... ...... ....... ..... ... --- --- ... _,. ... .... ...-. -~- ...........- --- ..--...-- ---.. -,- --.-
b7C more details to:
263D-Hol...- 263-HQ-ZERO
Se~ia .__
General lnfo,atjon-
.RESEARCH.PACKET: BIO sheetd for A.G. McCabe,!
land._!_ __.
Wed11esday, March 14, 20Jl/
_Page of/
This document
i11ternat product the lnterm~l lnlestig11tio11s Section llS), l1npectio11 Division, and should 1101
tfis. minated wit/tout l[S.itpprovol.
FBI 18-cv-01766-6
SSN ._____ ____,
ADJ. EOD: .07/07/1996 ADJ AGENT .EDD: 07/07/1996
DOB:._!_ ___.
,---____;...--=-.;,,, LOC/LEO PCT:
PHONE~.___ ____, PFl
PF6 PF7 PF8 PF9 PF10
l-! ~S~~
-1-~~=~ -l~~~-==~t-=~~=-l-=~= ==-l-=~==~~-l-~=~~-l-=~~~-:~~A=~~l- ~~N=~~-l
PFll PF12 PF13 PF14 PFlS P.Fl6 PF17 PF18 PF19 PF20 PROP. MIS(
DAlE 04-05-2018 NSICC-
FBI 18-cv-01766-8
GRADE ._______,T==r=-TL-=-E-___.
NFC --------------- ---------- ----- -------------------- ------
5.....____ _____, 0017 542 CONV SES CAR 09/27/2009 SUPVY SPECIAL AGENT 0017 849 INDIV CASH AWAR 09/30/2009 SUPVY SPECIAL AGENT 4420 721 .REASSIGNMENT
FBI 18-cv-01766-12
FBI 18-cv-01766-13
E.._ ____, ____, Internal Investigations Unit (Room .... INSD Front Offi~~ (Room .... Naocv McNamara Sec ....
DAO Ronald Twersky Seel
Internal Investigations Section (R~.o~.... ___.I
b7C SSAL......----------., ~APA
!:II!]- SSA
Initial P~ocessing Unit (Roo~.__ __, SSA ._..__ _.._ SMAP......._ MAP
....._ MAP....,.. CRS CRS
___. .cRs..__ Scott Hinckley
___, .~ffice Inspector General (Room
ASAC Jim Kirdar.
b7C ____.I ~~c -=1 Office Pro~essional Responsibility .... Adjudicati..;::;o.:.:n;.::I~---- uc.__l_ __.....
c_at-io_n_I_I_ __.....,
b7C b7C
FBI 18-cv-01766-18
FBI 18-cv-01766-19
JULY 2016 erial No. 11~
Printed for the use the Committee Oversight and Government Reform
Available via the World Wide Web:
DATE 04-0~-2018
FBI 18-cv-01 766-41
JULY 2016 rial No. 114-67
Printed for the use the Committee Oversight and Government Reform
DAlE 04-09-2018
Available via the World Wide Web:
21-323 PDF
For sale Superintendent Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office
lnwrnet: Phone: toll free (866) 512--1800: arc {202) 512-1800
Fax: (202) 512-2104 Moil: St.op !DCC, Washington, 20402-0001
FBI 18-cv-01766-42
JASON CHAFFETZ, Utah, Chairman
JOHN MICA, Florida
ELIJAH CUMMINGS, Maryland, Ranking
Minority Member
JOHN DUNCAN, JR., Tennessee
JUSTIN Al1ASH, Michigan
WM. LACY CLAY, Missouri
STEPHEN LYNCH, Massachusetts
JIM COOPER, nnessee
TREY GOWDY, South Carolina
MARK MEADOWS, North Carolina
TED EU, California
MICK MULVANEY, South Carolina
KEN BUCK, Colorado
MARK WALKER, North Carolina
BRENDAN BOYLE, Pennsylvania
JODY HICE, Georgia
DAVrD RAPALLO, Minority Staff Director
FBI 18-cv-01766-43 TENTS
Hearing held July 2016
The Hon. James Corney, Director, Federal Bureau Investigation
Oral Statement .................................................................................................
Mr. Steve Linick, Inspector General, Department State, Accompanied
Ms. Jennifer Costello, Assistant Inspector General for Evaluations and
Special Projects, Department State
Oral Statement ................................................................................................
Mr. Charles McCullough, III, Inspector General for the Intelligence Comm0~~rs~at~:i/h~..~.~~.c~~ ~:.~.a.t.~.~~~.~~~~~ ~.~~ ......... ............................
Sensitive Compartmented Information Nondisclosure Agreement, signed
Secretary State Hillary Rodham Clinton, submitted Rep. affetz ....... 122
Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement, signed Secretary State
Hillary Rodham Clinton, submitted Rep. Chaffetz ..................................... 124 July 2016 letter the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee from Richard Painter, Walter Richey, Professor Corporate
Law the University Minnesota Law School, submitted Rep. Lawrence ................................................. .................................................................... 126
Two reports from the Office Inspector General the State Department,
submitted Rep. Chaffetz ............................................................................... 128 Evaluation the Department States FOIA Process for Requests
Involving the Office the Secretary January 2016 .................................. 129 Office the Secretary: Evaluation Email Records Management
and Cybersecurity Requirements May 2016 ................................................. 157
Series memoranda from both the Department State Inspector General
and the ODNI Inspector General, submitted Rep. Chaffetz ....................... 240
Openi Statement submitted Rep. Elijah Cummings .............................. 255
FBI 18-cv-01766-44
Thursday, July 2016
The committee met, pursuant call, 10:04 a.m., Room
2154, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Jason Chaffetz [chairman the committee) presiding.
Present: Representatives Chaffetz, Mica, Duncan, Jordan,
Walberg, Amash, Gosar, DesJarlais, Gowdy, Farenthold, Lummis,
Massie, Meadows, DeSantis, Mulvaney, Buck, Walker, Blum, Hice,
Russell, Carter, Grothman, Hurd, Palmer, Cummings, Maloney,
Norton, Clay, Lynch, Cooper, Connolly, Cartwright, Duckworth,
Kelly, Lawrence, Lieu, Watson Coleman, Plaskett, DeSaulnier,
Boyle, Welch, and Lujan Grisham.
Chairman CHAFFETZ. The Committee Oversight and Government Reform will come order.
Without objection, the chair authorized declare recess
any time. want thank Director Corney for being here and doing
short notice. have the greatest admiration for the FBI. grandfather was career FBI agent. have got tell you, here because are mystified and
confused the fact pattern that you laid out and the conclusions
that you reached. seems that there are two standards, and there consequence for these types activities and dealing careless way with classified information. seems lot that the
average Joe, the average American, that they had done what you
laid out your statement, that theyd handcuffs and they
might their way jail, and they probably should, and
think there legitimate concern that there double standard. your name isnt Clinton youre not part the powerful elite,
that Lady Justice will act differently. concern that Lady Justice will take off that blindfold and come different conclusion.
Hillary Clinton created this mess. wasnt Republicans.
wasnt anybody else. She made very conscious decision. the
very day that she started her Senate confirmation, she set and
got domain name and set system avoid and bypass the
safety, security, and the protocol the State Department.
Classified information classified for reason. classified because were get out into the public, there are nefarious actors, nation-states, others that want harm this country,
and there are people who put their lives the line protecting and
serving our country, and when those communications are not se(1)
FBI 18-cv-01766-45
cure, puts their lives jeopardy. This classified information
entrusted very few, but there such duty and obligation protect that, fall your sword protect that, and yet there
doesnt seem any consequence
You know, was talking Trey Gowdy, and made really
good point with yesterday. Mr. Gowdy said, you know, your
statement, Mr. Director, you mentioned that there was precedent for this, but believe that you have set precedent, and its dangerous one. The precedent you sloppily deal with classified information, you are cavalier about it-and wasnt just
innocent mistake; this went for years-that there going consequence. are different nation the United States America.
are self-critical. Most nations would never this, but
the spirit making ourselves better. There will all kinds accusations about political this and political that. have defended
your integrity every step the way. You are the definitive voice. stand that, but mystified, and confused, because you
listen your fact pattern and come the conclusion that there consequence, dont know how explain that. will have
constituents ask us. Theyll get mad. They will pound the- you
know, theyre frustrated. They have seen this happen time and
time again. dont know how explain it, and hope that,
through this hearing, can stick the facts and understand this,
because there does seem two standards. There does seem consequence, and want understand that, and want able explain that the person thats sitting home, and
that why are here.
And yield back. now recognize the ranking member, Mr. Cummings.
Mr. CUMMINGS. Director Corney, thank you for being here today. want begin commending you and the public servants the
FBI for the independent investigation you conducted. You had
thankless task. matter what recommendation you made, you
were sure criticized. There question that you were extremely thorough. fact, some may even say you went too far
your investigation. But, course, that was your job; that your
Secretary Clinton has acknowledged that she made mistake
using personal email account, and you explained Tuesday that
she and her colleagues the State Department were extremely
careless with their emails, but after conducting this exhaustive review, you determined that reasonable prosecutor would bring
case based this evidence, and you and the career staff recommended against prosecution. Based the previous cases you
examined, prosecutors had gone forward, they would have been
holding the Secretary different standard from everyone else.
Amazingly-amazingly-some Republicans who were praising
you just days ago for your independence, for your integrity, and
your honesty instantly turned against you because your recommendation conflicted with the predetermined outcome they
wanted. their eyes, you had one job and one job only: prosecute Hillary Clinton.
FBI 18-cv-01766-46 refused so, now you are being summoned here answer for your alleged transgressions, and sense, Mr. Director, you are trial.
Contrary the claims your critics, there absolutely evidence that you made your recommendation for political reasons,
evidence that you were bribed coerced influenced, evidence
that you came your conclusion based upon anything but the facts
and the law. firmly believe that your decision was not based
convenience but conviction.
Today, House Republicans are doing what they always do, using
taxpayers money continue investigating claims that have already been debunked just keep them the headlines one more
day. When they hear political siren, they rush toward over and
over again, even the evidence not there. Exhibit Majority
Leader Kevin McCarthy, who admitted national television that
Republicans established the Benghazi Select Committee bring
down Secretary Clintons poll numbers. didnt say that; McCarthy
said it. The fact was confirmed Republican staffer that
committee who reported that was fired part for not going
along with the hyper focus Secretary Clinton. give House Republicans credit. They certainly are not shy about
what they are doing. They have turned political investigations into art form. our concerns here today are with the proper treatment classified information, then should start with the review our previous hearing General David Petraeus, who pled guilty last year intentionally and knowingly compromising highly classified information. The problem is, Mr. Director, never had that hearing. This committee ignored that breach national security because did not match the political goals the House Republicans. our concerns today were with finally addressing broken classification system which security levels are arbitrarily changed and down, that would have been legitimate goal, that would
have been valuable addition reforming and improving our government. After all, are the Government Reform Committee. could have held hearings here Zika, the Zika virus, preventing gun massacres like the one Orlando, host other
topics that could actually save peoples lives, but that not why are here. That not why our chairman called this emergency
hearing hours after you made your recommendation.
Everyone knows what this committee doing. Honestly, would
not surprised-and say this with all seriousness-I would not surprised if, tomorrow, Republicans set new committee
spend million plus why the FBI failed prosecute Hillary
Director Corney, let conclude with this request. Even with all
that have said, believe that there critical role for you today. have listened carefully the coverage this issue, and have
heard people say recently this morning, hours ago, that
they were mystified your decision. matter fact, the chairman repeated minute ago. And there perceived gap between the things you said Tuesday and your recommendation.
There gap, Mr. Director. So, this moment-and this critical moment-I beg you fill the gap, because when the gap not
FBI 18-cv-01 766-47
filled you, will filled others. Share with us, the American people, your process and your thinking; explain how you examined the evidence, the law, and the precedents; describe clear
terms how you and your team, career professionals, arrived this
decision. you can that today, you can that, that could long way toward people understanding your decision.
Finally, want make clear that condemn these completely
unwarranted political attacks against you. They have attacked you
personally. They have attacked your integrity. They have impugned
your professionalism. And they have even suggested that you were
somehow bought and paid for because you made your recommendation based upon the law and the facts. know you are used working the world politics, but these
attacks have been beyond the pale. you not deserve this.
Your family does not deserve it. And the highly skilled and dedicated agents the FBI not deserve it. honor your professionalism and your service our country.
And, again, even takes till hell freezes over, beg you close
the gap, tell what happened between what you found and your
decision that not only the members this panel and this Congress will understand but that Americans will understand. And you that, you that, then will all worth today.
With that, yield back.
Mr. MICA. Mr. Chairman- Chairman CHAFFETZ. think-hold one second, with your indulgence. the ranking member, which have the greatest respect, you
asked for hearing General Petraeus and how that was dealt
with; you got it. will have one this Oversight Committee.
And the record will reflect that, the Judiciary Committee, repeatedly questioned Attorney General Holder, repeatedly questioned the FBI Director about the disposition that case, probably
more than any Member the House Senate. And you want hearing, will that.
Mr. CUMMINGS. Will the gentlemen yield?
Chairman CHAFFETZ. Yes.
Mr. CUMMINGS. Thank you.
Chairman CHAFFETZ. Number two, you complained that
havent done hearing Zika. The Oversight and Government
Reform Committee, believe, was the very first committee actually hearing Zika. That was chaired Mr. Mica, and
proud the fact that did Zika hearing, and did first.
Mr. CUMMINGS. Will the gentleman yield?
Chairman CHAFFETZ. Sure.
Mr. CUMMINGS. Can have another one, because the problem still there-Chairman CHAFFETZ. Absolutely.
Mr. CUMMINGS. -big time.
Chairman CHAFFETZ. Absolutely.
Mr. MICA. Mr. Chairman, would ask for unanimous consent
request that put the date the hearing the record this
time that chaired-thank you-on Zika.
Chairman CHAFFETZ. Absolutely.
[The information follows:]
FBI 18-cv-01766-48
The Subcommittee Transportation and Public Assets held
hearing February 24, 2016, titled, The Zika Virus: Coordination Multi- Agency Response.
Chairman CHAFFETZ. And the ranking member knows that
have held multiple hearings the criminal justice and criminal
justice reform. You asked for it. You are passionate about it. And did that well. suggest havent addressed some those issues, think, inaccurate.
Mr. CUMMINGS. dont think did that, Mr. Chairman, but,
again, late yesterday, with the problem Minnesota with
African American man being killed, would like have some hearings still the criminal justice system. Thank you.
Chairman CHAFFETZ. Thank you.
Mr. CUMMINGS. Thank you very much.
Chairman CHAFFETZ. Without objection. going work with
you that-Mr. CUMMINGS. Thank you.
Chairman CHAFFETZ. -as have every step the way.
Mr. CUMMINGS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. appreciate it.
Chairman CHAFFETZ. Without objection, the chair authorized declare recess any time. will hold the record open for legislative days for any members who would like submit
written statement. will now recognize our distinguished witness for our first
panel. pleased welcome the Honorable James Corney, the
Director the Federal Bureau Investigations. welcome Director Corney, and thank you for being here.
Pursuant committee rules, all witnesses are sworn before
they testify. you will please rise and raise and right hand. you solemnly swear affirm that the testimony you are
about give the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the
Mr. COMEY. do.
Chairman CHAFFETZ. Thank you.
Let the record reflect that the witness answered the affirmative.
Mr. Corney, the floor yours. You can take long short you would like. you have any written statement that you
would like submit afterwards, are happy that well,
and will made part the record. The time now yours.
Director Corney, you are recognized.
Mr. COMEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Cummings, members the committee. proud here today representing the people the FBI, who did this investigation, they all their work, competent, honest, and independent way. believe this investigation was conducted consistent with the highest traditions the
FBI. Our folks did apolitical and professional way, including our recommendation the appropriate resolution this
case. said statement Tuesday, expected there would significant public debate about this recommendation, and big fan transparency, welcome the conversation are
FBI 18-cv-01766-49
going have here today. And think whole lot folks have
questions about, why did reach the conclusion did, and
what was our thinking? And hope very much get opportunity address that and explain it. And hope, the end
day, people can disagree, can agree, but they will least understand that the decision was made and the recommendation was
made the way you would want be: people who didnt give hoot about politics but who cared about, what are the facts, what the law, and how have similar people, all people, been treated the past?
Maybe could just say few words the beginning that would
help frame how think about this. There are two things that
matter criminal investigation subject: What did the person
do? And when they did that thing, what were they thinking?
When you look the hundred years plus the Justice Departments investigation and prosecution the mishandling classified information, those two questions are obviously present: What
did the person do? Did they mishandle classified information? And
when they did it, did they know they were doing something that
was unlawful? That has been the characteristic every charged
criminal case involving the mishandling classified information. happy through the cases particular. our system law, theres thing called mens rea. Its important know what you did, but when you did it, this Latin phrase
mens rea means, what were you thinking? And dont want
put people jail unless prove that they knew they were doing
something they shouldnt do. That the characteristic all the
prosecutions involving mishandling classified information.
There statute that was passed 1917 that, its face,
makes crime, felony, for someone engage gross negligence. that would appear say: Well, maybe that circumstance, you dont need prove they knew they were doing
something that was unlawful; maybe its enough prove that they
were just really, really careless, beyond reasonable doubt. the time Congress passed that statute 1917, there was
lot concern the House and the Senate about whether that was
going violate the American tradition requiring that, before
youre going lock somebody up, you prove they knew they were
doing something wrong, and there was lot concern about it.
The statute was passed. best can tell, the Department Justice has used once the years since, reflecting that same concern. know, from years with the Department Justice, they
have grave concerns about whether its appropriate prosecute
somebody for gross negligence, which why theyve done once
that know case involving espionage.
And when look the facts gathered here, said,
see evidence great carelessness, but not see evidence that sufficient establish that Secretary Clinton those with whom
she was corresponding both talked about classified information
email and knew, when they did it, they were doing something that
was against the law, right?
So, given that assessment the facts and understanding
the law, conclusion was and remains reasonable prosecutor
would bring this case. reasonable prosecutor would bring the
FBI 18-cv-01766-50
second case hundred years focused gross negligence. And know thats been source some confusion for folks. Thats
just the way is. know the Department Justice. know reasonable prosecutor would bring this case. know lot former
friends are out there saying they would. wonder where they were
the last years, because like see the cases they brought
gross negligence. Nobody would; nobody did. judgment was the appropriate resolution this case was
not with criminal prosecution. said, folks can disagree about
that, but hope they know that view, not just view but
team, was honestly held, fairly investigated, and communicated
with unusual transparency, because know folks care about it. look forward this conversation. look forward answering many questions possibly can. Ill stay long you
need stay, because believe transparency matters tremendously. And thank you for the opportunity.
Chairman CHAFFETZ. Thank you, Director. going recognize
myself here.
Physically, where were Hillary Clintons servers?
Mr. COMEY. The operational server was the basement her
home New York. The reason answering that way because sometimes, after they were decommissioned, they were
moved other facilities, storage facilities, but the live device was
always the basement.
Chairman CHAFFETZ. Was that authorized unauthorized location?
Mr. COMEY. was unauthorized location for the transmitting classified information.
Chairman CHAFFETZ. reasonable unreasonable expect
Hillary Clinton would receive and send classified information?
Mr. COMEY. Secretary State? Reasonable that the Secretary State would encounter classified information the course the
Secretarys work.
Chairman CHAFFETZ. Via email?
Mr. COMEY. Sure, depending upon the nature the system.
communicate classified information, would have classified-rated email system.
Chairman CHAFFETZ. But you did find more than 100 emails that
were classified that had gone through that server, correct?
Mr. COMEY. Right. Through unclassified server, correct.
Chairman CHAFFETZ. Yes. Hillary Clinton did come possess
documents and materials containing classified information via
email these unsecured servers, correct?
Mr. COMEY. That correct.
Chairman CHAFFETZ. Did Hillary Clinton lie?
Mr. COMEY. the FBI? have basis conclude she lied the FBI.
Chairman CHAFFETZ. Did she lie the public?
Mr. COMEY. Thats question not qualified answer. can
speak about what she said the FBI.
Chairman CHAFFETZ. Did Hillary Clinton lie under oath?
Mr. COMEY. the-not the FBI, not the case were
FBI 18-cv-01766-51
Chairman CHAFFETZ. Did you review the documents where Congressman Jim Jordan asked her specifically, and she said, quote,
There was nothing marked classified emails, either sent
received, end quote?
Mr. COMEY. dont remember reviewing that particular testimony. aware that being said, though.
Chairman CHAFFETZ. Did the FBI investigate her statements
under oath this topic?
Mr. COMEY. Not knowledge. dont think there has been referral from Congress.
Chairman CHAFFETZ. you need referral from Congress investigate her statements under oath?
Mr. COMEY. Sure do.
Chairman CHAFFETZ. Youll have one. Youll have one the next
few hours.
Did Hillary Clinton break the law?
Mr. COMEY. connection with her use the email server,
judgment that she did not.
Chairman CHAFFETZ. Did you-youre just not able prosecute
it, did Hillary Clinton break the law?
Mr. COMEY. Well, dont want give overly lawyerly answer,
but the question always look is, there evidence that would
establish beyond reasonable doubt that somebody engaged conduct that violated criminal statute? And judgment here
there not.
Chairman CHAFFETZ. The FBI does background checks. Hillary
Clinton applied for the job the FBI, would the FBI give Hillary
Clinton security clearance?
Mr. COMEY. dont want answer hypothetical. The FBI has robust process which adjudicate the suitability people for
employment the Bureau.
Chairman CHAFFETZ. Given the fact pattern you laid out less
than hours ago, would person who had dealt with classified
information like that, would that person granted security
clearance the FBI?
Mr. COMEY. would very important consideration the
suitability determination.
Chairman CHAFFETZ. Youre kind making point, Director.
The point being, because injected the word Hillary Clinton, you
gave different answer, but came you and said that
this person was extremely careless with classified information; the
exposure hostile actors; had used-despite warnings-created
unnecessary burdens and exposure; they said that they had one
device and you found out that they had multiple devices; there
had been email chains with somebody like Jake Sullivan asking for
classification changes, youre telling that the FBI would grant security clearance that person?
Mr. COMEY. not- hope giving consistent-Im not saying what the answer would be. saying that would important consideration suitability determination for anybody.
Chairman CHAFFETZ. And just-personally, just think that
sounds like bit political answer, because cant imagine that
the FBI would grant security clearance somebody with that
fact pattern. you agree disagree with that?
FBI 18-cv-01766-52
Mr. COMEY. Ill say what said before: again, its very hard
answer hypothetical. Ill repeat it. would very important consideration suitability determination.
Chairman CHAFFETZ. Did Hillary Clinton anything wrong?
Mr. CoMEY. What you mean wrong?
Chairman CHAFFETZ. think its self-evident.
Mr. COMEY. Well, lawyer. investigator. And ImI hope-a normal human being.
Chairman CHAFFETZ. you really believe there should
consequence for Hillary Clinton how she dealt with this?
Mr. CoMEY. Well, didnt say-I hope folks remember what
said Tuesday. didnt say theres consequence for someone
who violates the rules regarding the handling classified information. There are often very severe consequences the FBI involving
their employment, involving theirday, involving their clearances.
Thats what said Tuesday. hope folks walk away understanding that, just because someones not prosecuted for mishandling classified information, that doesnt mean, you work
the FBI, there arent consequences for it.
Chairman CHAFFETZ. Hillary Clinton anybody had
worked the FBI, under this fact pattern, what would you
that person?
Mr. CoMEY. There would security review and adjudication their suitability, and range discipline could imposed
from termination reprimand and, between, suspensions, loss clearance. you could walked out you could-depending
upon the nature the facts, you could reprimanded, but there robust process handle that.
Chairman CHAFFETZ. Ive gone past time. yield back. now recognize the ranking member, Mr. Cummings.
Mr. CUMMINGS. Thank you very much.
Director Corney-and want thank you very much for being
here today, especially such short notice. You and your staff
should commended for the thorough and dedicated review you
conducted. Unfortunately, some colleagues are now attacking
you personally because your final recommendation conflicted with
their preconceived political outcome this case.
Some have tried argue that this case far worse than the
case General David Petraeus, who was convicted 2015
knowingly and intentionally compromising highly classified information. fact, one very vocal politician all know said this, and quote: she isnt indicted, the only reason because the Democrats are protecting her. She being protected 100 percent, because you look David-General Petraeus, you look all the
other people that did fraction what she did, but she has much
worse judgment than had, and shes getting away with it, and
its unfair him, end quote.
Director Corney, you were the Director the FBI when General
Petraeus pied guilty. that right?
Mr. COMEY. Yes.
Mr. CUMMINGS. understand that case correctly, General
Petraeus kept highly classified information eight personal notebooks his private residence. that correct?
FBI 18-cv-01766-53
Mr. COMEY. That correct.
Mr. CUMMINGS. According the filings that case, this note-
book included the identities covert officers. They also included
war strategy, intelligence capabilities, diplomatic discussions,
quotes and deliberative discussions from high-level National Security Council meetings and discussions with the President. General
Petraeus shared his information with his lover and then biographer. was caught audiotape telling her, and quote,
mean, they are highly classified, some them. They dont have
on-on it, but, mean, theres code word stuff there, end
Director Corney, what did General Petraeus mean when said intentionally shared, quote, code word information with her?
What does that mean?
Mr. COMEY. The Petraeus case, mind, illustrates perfectly
the kind cases the Department Justice willing prosecute.
Even there, they prosecuted him for misdemeanor. that case,
you had vast quantities highly classified information, including
special-sensitive compartmented information-thats the reference code words-a vast quantity it, not only shared with someone
without authority have it, but found search warrant
hidden under the insulation his attic, and then lied
about during the investigation. you have obstruction justice. You have intentional misconduct and vast quantity information. admitted knew
that was the wrong thing do. That perfect illustration the
kind cases that get prosecuted. mind, illustrates, importantly, the distinction this case.
Mr. CUMMINGS. And General Petraeus did not admit these
facts when the FBI investigators first interviewed him. Did he?
Mr. COMEY. No. lied about it.
Mr. CUMMINGS. But did admit these facts plea agreement. that correct?
Mr. COMEY. Yes.
Mr. CUMMINGS. Heres what the Department filing said about
General Petraeus, and quote: The acts taken defendant David
Howell Petraeus were all respects knowing and deliberate and
were not committed mistake, accident, other innocent reason, end quote. that accurate summary, your view, Director Corney?
Mr. COMEY. Yes. actually leaves out important part the
case, which the obstruction justice.
Mr. CUMMINGS. Was charged with obstruction justice?
Mr. COMEY. No.
Mr. CUMMINGS. And why not?
Mr. COMEY. decision made the leadership the Department Justice not insist upon plea that felony.
Mr. CUMMINGS. the question is, you agree with the claim
that General Petraeus, and quote, got trouble for far less, end quote?
Mr. COMEY. No.
Mr. CUMMINGS. you agree with that statement?
Mr. COMEY. No. Its the reverse.
Mr. CUMMINGS. And what you mean that?
FBI 18-cv-01766-54
Mr. COMEY. His conduct, me, illustrates the categories behavior that mark the prosecutions that are actually brought: clearly intentional conduct, knew what was doing was violation
the law, huge amounts information that, even you couldnt
prove knew it, raises the inference that did it-right-an
effort obstruct justice. That combination things makes worthy prosecution, misdemeanor prosecution but prosecution
Mr. CUMMINGS. Sitting here today, you stand the FBIs recommendation .to prosecute General Petraeus?
Mr. COMEY. Oh, yeah.
Mr. CUMMINGS. you stand the FBIs recommendation not prosecute Hillary Clinton?
Mr. CoMEY. Yes.
Mr. CUMMINGS. Director Corney, how many times have you testified before Congress about the General Petraeus case? you
Mr. COMEY. dont think Ive ever testified-I dont think Ive
testified about all. dont think so.
Mr. CUMMINGS. With that, would yield back.
Chairman CHAFFETZ. have check the record, but believe
asked you question about the time, but maybe not.
Mr. COMEY. You could have. Thats why was-Chairman CHAFFETZ. Yeah, yeah.
Mr. COMEY. -squinching face. could have been Judiciary Committee hearing was asked about it.
Chairman CHAFFETZ. Yeah.
Well now recognize the gentleman from South Carolina, Mr.
Gowdy, for minutes.
Mr. GOWDY. Good morning, Director Corney. Secretary Clinton
said she never sent received any classified information over her
private email. Was that true?
Mr. COMEY. Our investigation found that there was classified information sent-Mr. GOWDY. was not true?
Mr. COMEY. Right. Thats what said.
Mr. GOWDY. Okay. Well, looking for little shorter answer you and are not here quite long.
Secretary Clinton said there was nothing marked classified
her emails either sent received. Was that true?
Mr. COMEY. Thats not true. There were small number portion markings on, think, three the documents.
Mr. GOWDY. Secretary Clinton said: did not email any classified
material anyone email. There classified material.
Was that true?
Mr. CoMEY. No. There was classified material emailed.
Mr. GOWDY. Secretary Clinton said she used just one device. Was
that true?
Mr. COMEY. She used multiple devices during the years her
term Secretary State.
Mr. GOWDY. Secretary Clinton said all work-related emails were
returned the State Department. Was that true?
Mr. COMEY. No. found work-related emails, thousands, that
were not returned.
FBI 18-cv-01766-55
Mr. GOWDY. Secretary Clinton said neither she nor anyone else
deleted work-related emails from her personal account. Was that
Mr. COMEY. Thats harder one answer. found traces
work-related emails devices slack space, whether they
were deleted whether when server was changed out, something happened them. Theres doubt that there were workrelated emails that were removed electronically from the email system.
Mr. GOWDY. Secretary Clinton said her lawyers read every one the emails and were overly inclusive. Did her lawyers read the
email content individually?
Mr. CoMEY. No.
Mr. GOWDY. Well, the interests time and because have
plane catch tomorrow afternoon, not going through any
more the false statements, but going ask you put
your old hat.
False exculpatory statements, they are used for what?
Mr. COMEY. Well, either for substantive prosecution for evidence intent criminal prosecution.
Mr. GOWDY. Exactly. Intent and consciousness guilt, right?
that right?
Mr. COMEY. Right.
Mr. GOWDY. Consciousness guilt and intent.
Mr. COMEY. Uh-huh.
Mr. GoWDY. your old job, you would prove intent, you just
referenced, showing the jury evidence complex scheme that
was designed for the very purpose concealing the public record,
and you would arguing, addition concealment, the destruction that you and just talked about certainly the failure preserve, you would argue all that under the heading contentyou would also-intent.
You would also arguing the pervasiveness the scheme,
when started, when ended, and the number emails, whether
they were originally classified classified. You would argue all that under the heading intent.
You would also probably, under common scheme plan, argue
the burn bags daily calendar entries the missing daily calendar entries common scheme plan conceal.
Two days ago, Director, you said reasonable person her position should have known private email was place send and
receive classified information. Youre right. average person does
know not that. This average person. This former
First Lady, former United States Senator, and former Secretary State that the President now contends the most competent,
qualified person president since Jefferson. didnt say that 2008, but says now. She affirmatively rejected efforts
give her account, she kept these private emails for almost years, and only turned them over Congress because
found out she had private email account. you have rogue email system set before she took the oath office, thousands what now know classified emails,
some which were classified the time, one her more frequent
email comrades was, fact, hacked, and you dont know whether
FBI 18-cv-01766-56 not she was, and this scheme took place over long period
time and resulted the destruction public records, and yet you
say there insufficient evidence intent. You say she was extremely careless but not intentionally so.
You and both know intent really difficult prove. Very rarely defendants announce: this day, intend break this
criminal code section. Just put everyone notice, going break the law this date. never happens that way. You have with circumstantial
evidence, youre Congress and you realize how difficult prove specific intent, you will formulate statute that allows for
gross negligence. time out, but this really important. You mentioned
theres precedent for criminal prosecution. fear there still
isnt. Theres nothing keep future Secretary State President from this exact same email scheme their staff. And real
fear this-its what the chairman touched upon-this double
track justice system that is, rightly wrongly, perceived this
country that you are private the Army and you email yourself classified information, you will kicked out, but you are
Hillary Clinton and you seek promotion Commander Chief,
you will not be. what hope you can today help the average-the reasonable person you made reference to, the reasonable person under
stand why she appears treated differently than the rest
would be.
With that, would yield back.
Chairman CHAFFETZ. Well now recognize the gentlewoman from
New York, Mrs. Maloney.
Mrs. MALONEY. Director, thank you for your years public service. You have distinguished yourself the assistant U.S. attorney
for both the Southern District New York and the Eastern District Virginia. Thats why you were appointed President Bush the Deputy Attorney General the Department Justice
and why President Obama appointed you the Director the FBI 2013.
Despite your impeccable reputation for independence and integrity, Republicans have turned you with vengeance immediately after you announced your recommendation not pursue
criminal charges against Secretary Clinton. Let give you some
examples. Representative Turner said, and quote: The investigation the FBI steeped political bias, end quote.
Was your investigation steeped political bias, yes no?
Mr. CoMEY. No. was steeped kind bias.
Mrs. MALONEY. Thank you. The Speaker the House, Paul
Ryan, was even more critical. accused you not applying the
law equally. said your recommendation shows, and quote, the
Clintons are living above the law. Theyre being held different
set standards. That clearly what this looks like, end quote.
How you respond his accusations that you held the Clintons different set standards than anyone else? Did you hold them different standard the same standard?
FBI 18-cv-01766-57
Mr. COMEY. Its just not-its just not accurate. try very hard apply the same standard whether youre rich poor, white
black, old young, famous not known all. just hope folks will take the time understand the other cases,
because theres lot confusion out there about what the facts
were the other cases that understand lead good people, reasonable people, have questions.
Mrs. MALONEY. Senator Cruz also criticized you. said that
there are, and quote, serious concerns about the integrity Director Corneys decision. stated that you, quote, you had rewritten clearly worded Federal criminal statute.
Did you rewrite the law any way rewrite any statute?
Mr. COMEY. No.
Mrs. MALONEY. Now, hesitate, truly hesitate mention the
next one, but Donald Trump took these conspiracy theories totally new level. said, and quote: was accident that
charges were not recommended against Hillary the exact same day President Obama campaigned with her for the first time. did you plan the timing your announcement help Secretary Clintons campaign event Tuesday?
Mr. COMEY. No. The timing was entirely own. Nobody knew was going it, including the press. very proud the way
the FBI-nobody leaked that. didnt coordinate it, didnt tell.
Just not consideration.
Mrs. MALONEY. Thank you. Mr. Trump also claimed that Secretary Clinton bribed the Attorney General with extension
her job and guess this somehow affected your decision. know its ridiculous question, but have ask it. Did you
make your decision because some kind bribe the Attorney
Mr. COMEY. No.
Mrs. MALONEY. tell you, are you surprised, am, the intensity the attacks from the GOP you after having made
decision, thoughtful decision, independent decision with the
professional staff the FBI?
Mr. COMEY. not surprised the intense interest and debate. predicted it. think its important that talk about these
things. They inevitably become focused individual people. Thats
okay. Well just continue have the conversation.
Mrs. MALONEY. believe that what were seeing today that
the GOP does not like the results investigation how
turns out-and saw they originally were lauding you-the
minute you made your announcement, theyre now attacking you,
the same people. And now predict theyll calling for more hearings, more investigations, all the expense the taxpayer, and
they this instead working what the American people really
care about. They want Congress focus jobs, the environment,
Homeland Security, the security our Nation, affordable childcare,
affordable college educations, and economy that works and helps
all people. thank you for performing your job with distinction and the long
history your whole profession integrity and independence. And
thank you very much. time has expired.
Chairman CHAFFETZ. thank the gentlewoman.
FBI 18-cv-01766-58
Well now recognize the gentleman from Ohio, Mr. Jordan, for
Mr. JORDAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Director, thank you for being with us. Tuesday, you said any
reasonable person Secretary Clintons position should have
known that unclassified system was place for these conversations. You said Tuesday some her emails bore classified markings, and you also said Tuesday there were potential violations the appropriate statutes.
Now, know bunch prosecutors back home would look
that fact pattern, look that evidence, you even referenced your
opening statement, some your prosecutor-friends the prosecution business have been and said they would have looked that same evidence and they would have taken grand
jury, but Tuesday, you said and, today, your opening statement, you said reasonable prosecutor would bring such case.
And then your statement Tuesday, you cite factors that helped
you make that decision and make that statement, and one the
factors you said was consider the context persons actions.
Now, typically, when hear context the course criminal
investigation, its from the defense side, not the prosecution side;
its the end the case, after theres been trial and guilty
verdict; and its during the sentencing phase, mitigating circumstances. Thats the context typically think about, but you
said the front end. You said consider the context the persons actions, and curious, what does consider the conte?(t
mean? Because lot Americans are thinking just what the chairman talked about his opening statement, that there are two
standards, one for the people and one for the politically connected. lot folks get the privilege representing back
Ohio think that when you said consider the context, they think
thats what Mr. Gowdy just talked about, the fact that shes
former First Lady, former Secretary State, former Senator, major
partys nominee for the highest office the land, and, oh, the
way, her husband just met with the individual you work with airport Arizona days ago. you said none that influenced your decision, but tell
what consider the context means.
Mr. GOMEY. Yeah. Thank you, Mr. Jordan. What was trying
capture the fact that the exercise prosecutorial discretion
always judgment call, every single case, and among the
things you consider are, what was this persons backgi:ound? What
was the circumstances the offense? Were they drunk? Were they
inflamed passion? Was somebody who had sufficient level education and training and experience that can infer certain
things from that, consider the entire circumstances the persons offense conduct and background? did not mean consider
political context.
Mr. JORDAN. Okay. The entire circumstances, and Mr. Gowdy
just talked about this scheme, remember what she did, right? She
sets this unique server arrangement. She alone controls it.
that server, that email system are her personal emails, her
work-related emails, Clinton Foundation information, and, now
know, classified information. This gets discovered. find out this
FBI 18-cv-01 766-59
arrangement exists. Then what happens? Her lawyers, her legal
team decides which ones get and which ones they get keep.
They made the sort front end. And then found out the ones
that they kept and didnt give us, didnt give the American
people, didnt give Congress, the ones they kept, they destroyed
them. And you dont have take word. Ill take what you said Tuesday. They deleted all emails that they did not return the
State Department, and the lawyers cleaned their devices such
way preclude complete forensic recovery. Now, that sounds
like fancy way saying they hid the evidence, right? And you
just told Mr. Gowdy thousands emails fell into those categories.
Now, that seems provide some context what took place
Did Secretary Clintons legal team-excuse me. Let ask
this way. Did Secretary Clinton know her legal team deleted those
emails that they kept from us?
Mr. COMEY. dont believe so.
Mr. JORDAN. Did Secretary Clinton approve those emails being
Mr. COMEY. dont think there was any specific instruction
conversation between the Secretary and her lawyers about that.
Mr. JORDAN. Did you ask that question?
Mr. COMEY. Yes.
Mr. JORDAN. Did Secretary Clinton know that her lawyers
cleaned devices such way preclude complete forensic recovery?
Mr. COMEY. dont believe that she did.
Mr. JORDAN. Did you ask that question?
Mr. COMEY. Yes.
Mr. JORDAN. you see how someone could view the context
what she did? Set private system. She alone controlled it. She
kept everything it. now know from Ms. Abedins deposition
that they did for that very reason, one could see what was
there, based the deposition Ms. Abedin gave. And then when
they got caught, they deleted what they had and they scrubbed
their devices. that part the context evaluating this decision?
Mr. COMEY. Sure. Sure. And understand what inferences can
drawn from that collection facts, course.
Mr. JORDAN. All right.
Mr. Chairman, yield back.
Chairman CHAFFETZ. thank the gentleman.
Ill now recognize the gentlewoman from the District Columbia, Ms. Norton, for minutes.
Ms. NORTON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Director Corney, appreciate your conduct this investigation nonpartisan way, keeping with the sterling reputation, which
has led Presidents both parties appoint you highly placed
law enforcement positions our Federal Government. want say for the record that this hearing, where you call the
prosecutor-and Mr. Corney stands the place the prosecutor,
because the Attorney General has accepted entirely the FBIs recommendations- where you call the prosecutor give account for
the decision prosecute not particular individual raises seri-
FBI 18-cv-01766-60
ous questions separation powers. And, particularly, when
youre questioning the prosecutors decision with respect the decision prosecute not particular individual, raises serious
bill attainder constitutional questions.
These hearings are often accusatory that they yield guidance how conduct business the future, and thats the
way looks. looks though that how this hearing going.
Now, course, now, everyone understands the abstract why important for security reasons use official government
mail-or email rather than private accounts-private email security matters are involved. Now, thats very broad, wide proposition.
Now, there are rules, far know, requiring Members
Congress use their-as how they use their official email accounts, whether involving security not. The chairman this
committee lists his personal account, for example, his business
card. Im-no one says thats wrong. dont know its wrong
right, because theres guidance. Federal agency employees,
Members Congress often have secure information least sensitive information that shouldnt made public. Some our Members are the Intelligence Committee the defense committee
even this committee and may have such matters. Some these
matters may concern national security issues, and-I dont knowif something sensitive the itinerary youre going codel the route you are taking and where you will be, all that
could peoples personal emails. course, this the legislative branch, and spoke the separation powers, and not indicating that there should governmentwide sense that ordained from high, but there ought rules that everybody understands, especially after the Clinton
episode, about the use personal email. like your insight
for guidance far other Federal employees are concerned
even Members Congress and their staff, because think could
learn from this episode.
So, strictly from security standpoint, you believe that Federal employees, staff, even Members Congress, should attempt
guidance the issue the use personal emails versus some official form communication? What should learn from the process the Secretary has gone through? sure there will questions about how there was even confusion, for example, the State
Department, but what should learn when comes our own
use email the use Federal employees this question?
Mr. COMEY. Can answer, Mr. Chairman?
Chairman CHAFFETZ. Sure.
Mr. CoMEY. The most important thing learn that unclassified email system case for email conversation about classified matters. And that mean either sending document attachment over unclassified email that classified having conversation about something that classified subject
unclassified email system. Thats the focus the concern. Thats
the focus this investigation. That was also personal email
adds the concern about the case because the security
vulnerabilities associated with personal system, but the root
the problem people using unclassified systems conduct busi-
FBI 18-cv-01766-61
ness that classified. And all should have access to,
have access classified information, classified communication systems. The FBI has three levels: unclassified system, secret system, and top secret system. You can email all three, but you
need make sure you dont email the unclass system, even
thats government classified system, about matters that are classified. Thats the important lesson learned. Everybody ought
aware it. Everybody ought trained it. spend lot time training the FBI make sure folks are sensitive the need move classified discussion, even doesnt involve
sending document, the appropriate forum.
Ms. NORTON. Members Congress included?
Mr. COMEY. course.
Ms. NORTON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman CHAFFETZ. Well now recognize the gentleman from
Florida, Mr. DeSantis, for minutes.
Mr. DESANTIS. Director, and the reason why thats important because top secret information compromised, that could
damage our national security, correct?
Mr. COMEY. Yes, definition.
Mr. DESANTIS. And American lives are stake some instances, correct?
Mr. COMEY. Yes.
Mr. DESANTIS. You mentioned lot people were upset that
there were consequences for Secretary Clinton, but your
statement, you did point out that administrative and security consequences would appropriate someone demonstrated extreme
carelessness for classified information. those consequences, that would include potentially termination Federal employment?
Mr. COMEY. Correct.
Mr. DESANTIS. could include revocation security clearance?
Mr. COMEY. Yes.
Mr. DESANTIS. And could include ineligibility for future employment national security positions, correct?
Mr. COMEY. could.
Mr. DESANTIS. Now, would you the FBI Director allow someone the employ your agency work national security capacity that person had demonstrated extreme carelessness
handling top secret info?
Mr. COMEY. The best answer that would look very closely that suitability determination. Its hard answer the
abstract yes all cases, all cases, but would very
important suitability scrub.
Mr. DESANTIS. there would instances where someone could extremely careless but still maintain confidence? mean,
have lot people who are very competent this country who
would love work for your agency, but yet would be-potentially you would allow somebody extremely careless and continue on?
Mr. COMEY. Thats the trouble with answering hypothetical.
could imagine was long time ago, and was small amount conduct something. Thats why its hard say other than
would very important part the-
FBI 18-cv-01766-62
Mr. DESANTIS. Lets just put this way. Would being extremely
careless handling top secret information expose employee
the FBI potential termination?
Mr. COMEY. Yes.
Mr. DESANTIS. Why shouldnt U.S. officials use mobile devices
when traveling foreign countries, especially theyre discussing
classified sensitive information?
Mr. COMEY. Because the mobile device will transmit its signal
across networks that are likely controlled least accessed
that hostile power.
Mr. DESANTIS. And thats the guidance that the FBI gives all officials when theyre traveling overseas. Thats still good guidance,
Mr. COMEY. Thats good guidance.
Mr. DESANTIS. How did top secret information end the private server? Because your statement addressed Secretary Clinton.
You did not address any her aides your statement. Attorney
General Lynch exonerated everybody. That information just didnt
get there its own, how did get there? Were you able determine that?
Mr. COMEY. Yes. people talking about top secret subject email communication.
Mr. DESANTIS. was-Mr. COMEY. Its not about forwarding top secret document; its
about having conversation about matter that top secret.
Mr. DESANTIS. And those were things that were originated
Secretary Clintons aides and then sent her, which would obviously her server, but was also included Secretary Clinton
originating those emails, correct?
Mr. COMEY. Thats correct. most circumstances, initiated
with aides starting conversation. the one involving top secret
information, Secretary Clinton, though, also not only received but
also sent emails that talked about the same subject.
Mr. DESANTIS. And that top secret information that you found,
would somebody who was sophisticated those matters, should
have been obvious them that that was very sensitive information?
Mr. COMEY. Yes.
Mr. DESANTIS. guess issue about knowledge what
youre doing order for Secretary Clinton have access top
secret/SCI information, didnt she have sign form with the
State Department acknowledging her duties and responsibilities
under the law safeguard this information?
Mr. CoMEY. Yes. Anybody who gets access SCI, sensitive compartmented information, would sign whats called read-in form
that lays that out. sure Members Congress have seen the
same thing.
Mr. DESANTIS. And stresses that document and other training people would get that there are certain requirements handling certain levels information. For example, top secret document, that cant even your secret system the FBI, correct?
Mr. COMEY. Correct.
FBI 18-cv-01766-63
Mr. DESANTIS. you have follow certain guidelines. And
guess question is, shes very sophisticated person. She did
execute that document, correct?
Mr. COMEY. Yes.
Mr. DESANTIS. And her aides who were getting the classified information, they executed similar documents get security clearance, correct?
Mr. COMEY. believe so.
Mr. DESANTIS. And she knowingly clearly set her own private
server order to-well, actually, let ask you that. Was the reason she set her own private server, your judgment, because
she wanted shield communications from Congress and from the
Mr. COMEY. cant say that. Our best information that she set matter convenience. was already existing system
that her husband had, and she decided have domain that
Mr. DESANTIS. the question is, very sophisticated-this
information that clearly anybody who had knowledge security information would know that would classified-but having little bit trouble see, how would you not then know that that
was something that was inappropriate do?
Mr. COMEY. Well, just want take one your assumptions
about sophistication. dont think that our investigation established that she was actually particularly sophisticated with respect classified information and the levels and the treatment, and
far can tell- Mr. DESANTIS. Isnt she original classification authority,
Mr. COMEY. Yes, sir. Yes, sir.
Mr. DESANTIS. Good grief. Well, appreciate you coming. And
yield back the balance time.
Chairman CHAFFETZ. thank the gentleman. ask unanimous
consent enter into the record two documents that Mr. DeSantis
referred to. One the Sensitive Compartmented Information Nondisclosure Agreement. The other one the Classified Information
Nondisclosure Agreement. Both signed Hillary Rodham Clinton.
Without objection, ordered.
Chairman CHAFFETZ. now recognize the gentleman from Missouri, Mr. Clay, for minutes.
Mr. CLAY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you, Director
Corney, for being here today and for the professionals whom you
lead the FBI. Two years ago after urgent request thenformer Attorney General Eric Holder for expedited Justice Department investigation into the tragic death Michael Brown
Ferguson, Missouri, witnessed firsthand the diligence, professionalism, and absolute integrity your investigators. And have doubt that was the case this matter well. did not think was possible for the majority exceed their unprecedented arrogant abuse official channels and Federal funds that have witnessed over the past years they have engaged partisan
political witch hunt taxpayer expense against Secretary Clinton.
But was wrong. This proceeding just sequel that very
bad act. And the taxpayers will get the bill. new low, and
FBI 18-cv-01766-64 violates both House rules and the rules this committee.
with apologies you and the FBI for this blatantly partisan proceeding, let return the facts this case you have clearly
outlined them.
First question: Did Secretary Clinton any member her staff
intentionally violate Federal law?
Mr. COMEY. did not develop clear evidence that.
Mr. CLAY. Did Secretary Clinton any member her staff attempt obstruct your investigation?
Mr. COMEY. did not develop evidence that.
Mr. CLAY. your opinion, the mistakes Secretary Clinton has
already apologized for and expressed regret for rise level that
would worthy Federal prosecution?
Mr. COMEY. said Tuesday, our judgment, not just mine, but
the teams judgment the FBI, that the Justice Department
would not bring such case. Justice Department under anywhether Republican Democrat administration.
Mr. CLAY. Thank you for that response. know the FBI pays particular attention groups training agents and local law enforcement officers and participating local hate crime working groups. that right?
Mr. COMEY. Yes, sir.
Mr. CLAY. Some these organizations seem relatively harmless.
But others appear very dangerous and growing. Some even
promote genocide their postings and rhetoric online. your experience, how dangerous are these groups and have they incited violence the past?
Mr. COMEY. think too hard answer, Congressman, the abstract. There are some groups that are dangerous. There are some
groups that are exercising important protection-protected speech
under the First Amendment.
Mr. CLAY. Okay. Let ask more direct question. gentleman
named Andrew Anglin the editor Web site called The Daily
Stormer that dedicated the supremacy the white race
well attacking Jews, Muslims, and others. The Web site features
numerous posts with the hashtag white genocide protest what
they contend effort eliminate the white race. Are you familiar with this movement?
Mr. COMEY. not.
Mr. CLAY. Okay. Well, this hashtag has been promoted all over
social media growing number white supremacists. For example, one Nazi sympathizer tweeted repeatedly using the handle
@whitegenocidetm. Are you concerned some groups are increasing their followers this way, particularly some those followers this way, particularly some those followers could become violent?
Mr. COMEY. dont know the particular enough comment, Congressman. are always concerned when people beyond protected speech, which not investigate, moving towards acts violence. And our duty figure out when have people
walked outside the First Amendment protection and are looking
kill folks hurt folks. But dont know enough comment the
FBI 18-cv-01766-65
Mr. CLAY. see. Well, one biggest concerns that certain
public figures are actually promoting these dangerous groups even
further. And you may know, one our most vocal candidates
for President retweeted @whitegenocidetm. Three weeks later,
did again. Two days after that, retweeted different user
whose image also included the term white genocide, and thats
not even all them. Director Corney, dont these actions make
easier for these racist groups recruit even more supporters?
Mr. COMEY. dont think position answer that
intelligent way sitting here.
Mr. CLAY. Well, appreciate you trying. And thank you, Mr. Director, for your exceptional and principled service our country. yield back.
Chairman CHAFFETZ. Thank you. Well now recognize the gentlewoman from Wyoming, Mrs. Lummis, for minutes.
Mrs. LUMMIS. Welcome, Director. And thank you much for
being here. phone has been ringing off the hook Washington office, Wyoming office, from constituents who dont
understand how this conclusion was reached. appreciate your
being here help walk through it. And heres the issue that
the people that are calling from Wyoming are having. They
have access this statute. Its Title U.S. Code 1924. And
going read you this statute. says, Whoever being officer,
employee, contractor, consultant the United States and virtue his office employment, position, contract becomes possessed documents materials containing classified information the United States knowingly removes such documents materials without authority and with the intent retain such documents materials unauthorized location shall fined
under this title imprisoned for not more than one year both.
Armed with that information, theyre wondering how Hillary
Clinton, who also attorney, and attorneys are frequently held higher standard knowledge the law, how this could not
have come her attention. She was the Secretary State.
course, the Secretary State going become possessed classified materials. course she was attorney. She practiced with prominent Arkansas law firm, the Rose Law Firm. She knew
from her White House days with her husband, the President, that
classified materials can very dangerous they get into the
wrong hands.
She had have known about this statute because she had
have been briefed when she took over the job the Secretary
State. how, given that body knowledge and experience, could
this have happened way that could have potentially provided
access hackers confidential information?
Mr. COMEY. No, its good question, reasonable question. The
protection have Americans that the government general, and that statute particular, has prove before they can
prosecute any us, that did this thing thats forbidden the
law, and that when did it, knew were doing something
that was unlawful. dont have know the code number, but
that knew were doing something that was unlawful. Thats
the protection have. And its one Ive worked for very hard.
When was the private sector, did lot work with the
FBI 18-cv-01766-66
Chamber Commerce stop the criminalization negligence
the United States.
Mrs. LUMMIS. May interrupt and suggest that this statute says
knowingly removes such documents materials without authority
and with the intent retain such documents materials
unauthorized location. The intent here the statute retain
the documents unauthorized location. Its not intent pass
them terrorist, someone out Internetland. Its just
the intent retain the documents materials unauthorized
Mr. COMEY. Its more than that, though. Youd have show that
and prove criminal intent, both law, thats the way the judge
would instruct jury, and practice the Department Justice.
They have reserved that statute, even though its just misdemeanor, for people who clearly knew they were breaking the law.
And thats the challenge. should have known, must have known,
had know, does not get you there. You must prove beyond areasonable doubt that they knew they were engaged something that
was unlawful.
Mrs. LUMMIS. Okay. Then- Mr. COMEY. Thats the challenge.
Mrs. LUMMIS. Then may turn her attorneys. Did all Secretary Clintons attorneys have the requisite clearances the time
they received all her emails, especially those that were classified the time they were sent?
Mr. COMEY. No.
Mrs. LUMMIS. They destroyed, has been noted, 30,000 emails Secretary Clintons. you have 100 percent confidence that
none the 30,000 emails destroyed Secretary Clintons attorneys was marked classified?
Mr. CoMEY. dont have 100 percent confidence. reasonably
confident some them were classified. There were only three
the entire batch found that bore any markings that indicated
they were classified. thats less likely. But surely, its reasonable assumption that some the ones they deleted contained classified information.
Mr. BLUM. Thank you, Director. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
yield back.
Chairman CHAFFETZ. now recognize the gentleman from Massachusetts, Mr. Lynch, for minutes.
Mr. LYNCH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Director
Corney, for appearing here help the committee with its work. Director Corney, Secretary Clintons certainly not the only Secretary State use personal email account with information later
identified being classified. just want show you. This
book that was written former Secretary State Colin Powell.
And his book, says, complement the official State Department computer office, installed laptop computer and private line. personal email account laptop allowed
direct access anyone online. started shooting emails
principal assistants, individual ambassadors, and increasingly, foreign minister colleagues who like were trying bring
their ministries into the one 186,000 miles per second world. Were
FBI 18-cv-01 766-67
you aware this, that Secretary Colin Powell actually had private server well?
Mr. COMEY. Not private server. think used commercial
email account for State Department business.
Mr. LYNCH. Private line, unprotected.
Mr. CoMEY. Correct. Not State Department email system.
Mr. LYNCH. Right. Right. went rogue, speak. Right?
Mr. COMEY. dont know whether say that.
Mr. LYNCH. Yeah. All right. Okay. not going put words
your mouth. But you think this was careless for him that,
just start-you know, get his own-he got his own system.
installed laptop computer private line. personal email
account was laptop and allowed direct access anyone,
anyone online. Thats his own statement. just trying compare Secretaries State, because Secretary Powells never been
here. matter fact, when asked him for his emails, unlike
the 55,000 that received from Secretary Clinton, said,
dont have any turn over. This quote. This was ABCs
This Week. explained, dont have anything turn over.
didnt keep cache them. did not print them off. not have
thousands pages somewhere personal files. But was
Secretary State, and operated, you know, private system.
Were you aware that?
Mr. COMEY. Not the time years ago. But now.
Mr. LYNCH. Yeah. Okay. recently-well, back October 2015,
the State Department sent Secretary Powell letter requesting
that contact his email provider, AOL, determine whether any his emails are still the unclassified systems. Are you aware that ongoing investigation?
Mr. COMEY. dont know investigation. am-Mr. LYNCH. Well, that request for information from former Secretary Powell.
Mr. COMEY. Yes, am.
Mr. LYNCH. Youre aware that. Are you surprised that has
never responded?
Mr. COMEY. dont know enough comment. dont know exactly what conversation had with the State Department.
Mr. LYNCH. All right. trying look the-you know, where have lot comparisons other cases. And there seems, like
all the cases where prosecutions have gone forward, the subject
the investigation has demonstrated clear intent deliver classified information person persons who were unauthorized
receive that. you look the, you know, PFC Bradley Manning, now Chelsea Manning, that was court martial. But demonstrated clear intent publish that information, which was
classified. Julian Assange, the WikiLeaks editor, guess, and publisher.
Again, wide and deliberate attempt publish classified information. General Petraeus, which talked about earlier today,
shared information with his biographer. And Jeffrey Sterling sending stuff The New York Times. Former CIA officer Kiriakou, who
was interested writing book, hung his information.
And even former Director the CIA, John Deutch, who retained
classified information couple servers, one Belmont, Mas-
FBI 18-cv-01766-68
sachusetts, and one Bethesda, Maryland. And that was after
became private citizen. all those cases, theres clear intent. you said before,
you look what people did and what they were thinking when
they did that. And would just ask you: there clear distinction
between what those p~ople did and what Secretary Clinton did
her case?
Mr. CoMEY. view, yes. The Deutch case illustrates perfectly. And took huge amount documents, almost all the
TS/SCI level, had them hard copy his house, had them
unclassed system connected the Internet, attempted destroy
some them when got caught. Admitted: knew wasnt supposed doing this. you have clear intent, huge amounts
documents, obstruction justice, those are the kinds cases that
get prosecuted. Thats what said when-I meant when said
it. experience, which three decades, reasonable prosecutor would bring this case. know that frustrates people. But
thats the way the law is. And thats the way the practice the
Department Justice.
Mr. LYNCH. Thank you for your testimony and for your service. yield back.
Chairman CHAFFETZ. Thank you gentleman.
Well now the gentleman from North Carolina, Mr. Meadows, for minutes.
Mr. MEADOWS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Director Corney,
thank you. There has been much said today about criticizing you
and your service. And want record that even though
many constituents would love for criticize your service
because the conclusion you reached, never have nor will
criticize your service. And appreciate your service this country and the integrity. going focus the things that you
said, not the conclusion that you drew.
And Congressman Trey Gowdy and talked little bit about
this, but February 2016, Secretary Clinton, during presidential debate said, never sent received any classified material. They are retroactively classifying it, closed quote. And
your statement July you said that there were indeed 110
emails, email chains, which there was classified information the time was sent received. those two statements, both them cannot true. that correct? Your statement and her
Mr. COMEY. Yeah. Its not accurate say that she did not send receiveMr. MEADOWS. she did not tell the truth during that presidential debate that she never sent received classified information, and was retroactively classified?
Mr. COMEY. Yeah. dont think thats question should answering what was her head-Mr. MEADOWS. Well, either your statements not true hers
not true. Both them cannot true. your statement true?
Mr. COMEY. That can speak to. My-Mr. MEADOWS. Okay. Your statement true. the American
people will have judge with her statement not being true. let another one. October she said, There was noth-
FBI 18-cv-01766-69
ing marked classified emails either sent received. And
your statement you said, very small number emails contained
classified information bore markings indicating the presence
classified information the time. she makes statement that
says there was markings. You make statement that there was. her statement was not true.
Mr. CoMEY. Well, that one actually have little bit insight
into her statement, because asked her about that. There were
three documents that bore portion markings where youre obligated, when something classified, put marking that paragraph.
Mr. MEADOWS. Right.
Mr. COMEY. And there were three that bore parens, which
means thats confidential classified-Mr. MEADOWS. reasonable person who has been Senator, Secretary State, First Lady, wouldnt reasonable person
know that that was classified marking Secretary State?
Mr. COMEY. Yeah.
Mr. MEADOWS. reasonable person. Thats all asking.
Mr. COMEY. Yeah. Before this investigation probably would
have said yes. not sure. dont find incredibleMr. MEADOWS. Director Corney, come on. mean, Ive only been
here few years, and understand the importance those markings. youre suggesting that long length time that she had idea what classified marking would be? Thats your sworn testimony today?
Mr. CoMEY. No, no, not that she would have idea what classified marking would be. But its interesting question
whether she-this question about sophistication came earlier.
Whether she was actually sophisticated enough understand what parens mean.
Mr. MEADOWS. youre saying this former Secretary State
not sophisticated enough understand classified marking.
Mr. COMEY. No. Thats not what saying.
Mr. MEADOWS. Thats huge statement.
Mr. CoMEY. Thats not what saying. You asked did assume that someone would know. Probably before this investigation, would have. not sure that answer any longer. think
its possible, possible, that she didnt understand what meant
when she saw the body email like that.
Mr. MEADOWS. After years the Senate, and Secretary State? mean, thats hard for and the American people believe, Director Corney. And not questioning your analysis it, but
wouldnt reasonable person think that someone who has the highest job handling classified information understand that?
Mr. COMEY. think thats conclusion reasonable person
would draw. may not accurate.
Mr. MEADOWS. that, let little bit further. Because
that last quote actually came October 22, 2015, under sworn testimony before the Benghazi Committee. she gave sworn testimony that reasonable person would suggest was not truthful,
isnt logical assumption that she may have misled Congress,
and need look that further?
FBI 18-cv-01766-70
Mr. COMEY. Well, the reasonable person test not what you look for perjury false statements. But like said, can understand
why people would ask t}lat question.
Mr. MEADOWS. All right. let me, the last little portion
this, your 3-1/2 hour interview Saturday, did she contradict
some these public statements private? .Because you said she
didnt lie the FBI. But its apparent that she lied the American people. did she change her statements that sworn testimony with you last Saturday?
Mr. COMEY. havent gone through that parse that. have-Mr. MEADOWS. Can you that and get back this committee?
Because its important, think, the American people and
Mr. COMEY. sure. And the chairman and have talked
about, sure the committees going want see documents
our investigation and whatnot, and well work give you whatever can possibly give you under our law. But havent done that
analysis this point.
Mr. MEADOWS. Will you, and get that back us?
Chairman CHAFFETZ. The gentlemans time has expired And
well now recognize the gentleman from Tenhessee, Mr. Cooper, for minutes.
Mr. COOPER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you, Director
Corney. hate see one Americas most distinguished public
servants pilloried before this committee. Were all highly partisan
here. Were good back seat drivers. Were all today apparently armchair prosecutors. And you stated the truth when you said that you
didnt know anyone who would bring case like this. And some the prosecutors have had decades that. hope that this
committees effort not intended intimidate you the FBI
law enforcement general, government employees.
And thankful this moment that you have such lifetime
record speaking truth power. Because thats very important.
Its also very important that apparently youre lifelong Republican. Youre just here your job, state the facts. think the
key issue here whether, fact, heres double standard, where
some Americans are being treated differently than others. And
think can rely Republican colleagues make sure that
Hillary Clintons treated better than anybody else. There should some attention given make sure that shes not treated any
worse than anybody else. think all know that wouldnt having this hearing, especially emergency basis, unless she were running for President. colleague from Massachusetts has just pointed out that
previous Secretaries State are not being called the carpet,
whether that Condoleezza Rice Colin Powell others.
But think the grossest double standard here today the fact
that all the members this committee, every Member Congress, not subject the same law that Secretary Clinton was subject
to. And lawmakers, that means that have exempted ourselves from the standard other Federal employees. colleague
from D.C., Ms. Norton, referred this. Why did exempt ourselves from the same rules? Apparently our chairman lists his pri-
FBI 18-cv-01766-71
vate email account his business card. all have access classified information. would like challenge Republican colleagues here
today. Lets work together and introduce legislation make the
same laws apply apply the executive branch and Secretary Clinton. would .be happy join such legislation make
sure that were not being hypocritical this panel, that were
holding ourselves the same standards Secretary Clinton, and
not trying accuse her things that may guilty ourselves. bet colleagues would the first complain if, for example,
emails were retroactively classified. Thats situation that most
people public service would object pretty strongly. How did
you know the time you had idea? think its very important want Congress have the trust the American people not hypocritical, uphold the same standards that
want see upheld others, and just thankful this moment our history that have someone like you whos charge
the FBI. Because too many things are highly politicized. And the
last thing should criminalize our political system. didnt see any Republican colleagues complain when
former Governor Bob McDonald was exonerated 8-0 vote
the Supreme Court for having done certain things that think
most Americans would find highly objectionable. But our court, bipartisan, unanimous basis, exonerated him just week two
ago. think this moment for committee members reflect,
take deep breath, calm down and realize exactly what you
said, that reasonable prosecutor would have brought this case.
And thank you for stating that clearly and publicly. yield back
the balance time.
Mr. CUMMINGS. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. COMEY. yield the ranking member.
Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Director, let ask you this: First all,
associate myself with everything the gentleman just said. You were
talking about some markings little bit earlier. that right? Can
you describe what those markings are like? Markings documents. think you said there were three documents with certain
markings them-Mr. COMEY. Yeah.
Mr. CUMMINGS. that indicated classified. ahead.
Mr. COMEY. Yeah, there were three emails that down the body the email, the three different emails, there were paragraphs
that, the beginning the paragraph, had parenthesis, capital and then parenthesis. And that portion marking
indicate that-Mr. CUMMINGS. That paragraph.
Mr. COMEY. -that paragraph classified the confidential
level, which the lowest level classification.
Mr. CUMMINGS. And out the 30,000 documents, you found
these three markings? that what youre saying?
Mr. CoMEY. Three emails for markings down the body. None the emails had headers, which the top document that
FBI 18-cv-01 766-72
says its classified. Three had within the body the portion marking
Mr. CUMMINGS. Thank you.
Chairman CHAFFETZ. Thank the gentleman. now recognize the
gentleman from Tennessee, Mr. Duncan, for minutes.
Mr. DUNCAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Meadows mentioned one instance which Secretary Clinton said that she did
not mail any classified material anyone. Actually, she said that
several other times. But accurate, Director Corney, that you
found least 110 instances when she had emailed classified material?
Mr. COMEY. 110 that she either received sent.
Mr. DUNCAN. Right. And also accurate that, quote, Clintons
lawyers cleaned their devices such way preclude complete
forensic recovery?
Mr. CoMEY. Correct.
Mr. DUNCAN. And also when she said- when Secretary Clinton
said that nothing she sent was marked classified, and you said,
your press conference, but even information not marked classified email, particularly are participants who know should
know that the subject matters classified are still obligated protect it. you feel that Secretary Clinton knew, should have
known, that she was obligated protect classified information?
Mr. COMEY. Yes.
Mr. DUNCAN. With her legal background and her long experience government. Also, she said one point that she has directed all
emails, work-related emails, forwarded the State Department. also accurate that you discovered thousands other
emails that were work-related other than the 30,000 that she submitted?
Mr. COMEY. Correct.
Mr. DUNCAI~. Before came Congress, spent several years criminal court judge. presided over several hundred felony
criminal cases. And can assure you that saw many cases where
the evidence criminal intent was flimsier than the evidence
this case. But you realize that great numbers people across
this country felt that you presented such incriminating case
against Secretary Clinton your press conference that they were
very surprised even shocked when you reached the conclusion
let her off? You doubt that great numbers feel that way?
Mr. COMEY. No. think so. And understand the question. And wanted transparent possible. went this very
hard see could make case. And wanted the American
people see what honestly believed about the whole thing.
Mr. DUNCAN. Well, you understand, the chairman said earlier, that great numbers people feel now that theres one standard justice for the Clintons and another for regular people?
Mr. COMEY. Yeah, Ive heard that lot. Its not true, but Ive
heard lot.
Mr. DUNCAI~. Well, even the ranking member who was here, who, course understand, had defend Secretary Clinton
strongly possible, almost begged you explain the gap between the incriminating case that you presented and the conclusion
FBI 18-cv-01 766-73
that was reached. Did that surprise you that felt strongly
that there was this big gap?
Mr. COMEY. No. Not all. These-its complicated matter.
involves understanding how the Department Justice works
across decades, house prosecutorial discretion exercised. get
that folks see disconnection, especially when they see statute that
says gross negligence. Well, the Director just said she was extremely careless. how that not prosecutable? takes
understanding whats one over the last years. Whats the
precedent? How treat these cases. totally get peoples questions. And think theyre good faith.
Mr. DUNCAN. talked about gross negligence here. And you
said that Secretary Clinton was extremely careless with this classified material, and how dangerous could be, how threatening,
even peoples lives that could disclose classified material. you agree that there very thin line between gross negligence and extreme carelessness? And would you explain
what you consider that difference?
Mr. COMEY. Sure, Judge-Congressman. former judge, you
know there isnt actually great definition the law gross negligence. Some courts interpret close willful, which means
you know youre doing something wrong. Others drop lower.
term extremely careless is-Im trying kind ordinary
person. Thats commonsense way describing sure looks real
careless me. The question whether that amounts gross negligence, frankly, really not the center this, because when look the history the prosecutions and see its been one case
brought gross negligence theory, know from years, theres way anybody the Department Justice bringing case
against ohn Doe Hillary Clinton for the second time 100
years based those facts.
Mr. DUNCAN. You ended your statement Congressman Cooper while ago saying once again that reasonable prosecutor could
have brought this case. Yet you also mentioned earlier today that
youd seen several your friends and other prosecutors whove
said publicly, many across this country, that they would have been
glad prosecute this case.
Mr. COMEY. smile because theyre friends. And havent talked them. And want say: Guys, where were you over the last years? Where were these cases? They just have not been
brought. For reasons that said earlier, its good thing that the
Department Justice worries about prosecuting people for being
careless. dont like it. citizen want people show they
knew they were breaking the law, and then well put you jail.
Mr. DUNCAN. course, you know many people have been prosecuted for gross negligence the Federal Government, the FBI.
Chairman CHAFFETZ. The gentlemans time has expired.
Mr. DUNCAN. Thank you.
Chairman CHAFFETZ. Well now recognize the gentleman from
Virginia, Mr. Connolly, for minutes.
Mr. CONNOLLY. Thank you. And welcome, Director Corney. And
although our politics are different, gather youre Republican.
that correct?
FBI 18-cv-01766-74
Mr. COMEY. have been registered Republican for most
adult life. not registered any longer.
Mr. CONNOLLY. dont register party Virginia. But many
have suspected politics being Democratic. And thank you
for your integrity. colleague said, and said opening
statement, your career has been characterized speaking truth
power. And youre doing again today. Just set the context, Director Corney, not that youre unaware this.
Todays hearing political theatre. Theres not even the pretense trying get the truth. This desperate attempt under
extraordinary set circumstances, emergency hearing. dont
know what the emergency other than one side about nominate somebody who pathological narcissist who, you know,
talking about banning Muslims and Mexicans crossing the border
who are all rapists and women who are pigs and terrified the
prospect the consequences that the election. lets grab
onto whatever can discredit try discredit the other
nominee, punitive nominee. And you took away their only hope.
And the theater today actually trying discredit you. Subtlety some cases.. friend from South Carolina uses big words
like exculpatory. And kind goes through what prosecutor
would do. The insinuation being you didnt your job. friend
from Wyoming apparently flooded with citizens her home
State who are reading the statute that governs classification. Lot time their hands back there, guess. But, yeah, this all
designed discredit your finding. Now, the FBI interviewed Secretary Clinton. that correct?
Mr. COMEY. Yes.
Mr. CONNOLLY. Did she lie the FBI that interview?
Mr. COMEY. have basis for concluding that she was untruthful with us.
Mr. CONNOLLY. And crime lie the FBI?
Mr. COMEY. Yes, is.
Mr. CONNOLLY. David Petraeus did lie the FBI.
Mr. COMEY. Yes.
Mr. CONNOLLY. And prosecuted for that- well, could have
Mr. COMEY. Could have been, was not for tha~
Mr. CONNOLLY. Right. Thats always judgment call.
Mr. COMEY. Correct.
Mr. CONNOLLY. Was she evasive?
Mr. COMEY. dont think the agents assessed she was evasive.
Mr. CONNOLLY. How many emails are talking about, total
universe, that were examined your team?
Mr. COMEY. Tens thousands.
Mr. CONNOLLY. Tens thousands. And how many are questionable category that maybe could have, should have been looked more carefully because there could some element classification? Apparently, friend from North Carolina assumes were all
intimately familiar with the fact that appears, means
classification, though there seems some dispute about that because the State Department, understand it, has actually said
some those were improperly marked and shouldnt have had the Are you aware that?
FBI 18-cv-01766-75
Mr. COMEY. Yes.
Mr. CONNOLLY. Yes. could that her 100-trip, years100 overseas trips 100 countries Secretary State trying
restore U.S. credibility that had been destroyed the previous
years overseas, and tens thousands email communications, not
including phone calls and classified conversations SCIFs and the
like, that maybe the small percentage emails, she didnt pay
much attention them maybe retrospect one would hope she
would have. that fair conclusion? Could that fair conclusion?
Mr. CoMEY. dont usually deal maybes. Its possible.
Mr. CONNOLLY. Well, you deal distinguishing between willful and inadvertent.
Mr. COMEY. Sure.
Mr. CONNOLLY. And this case, you concluded