Fox News reported a memo from the House Judiciary and Oversight committees revealed that “foreign actors” accessed some of Hillary Clinton’s emails when she served as secretary of state, including one classified.

Remember, she used a private server during her tenure.

From Fox News (emphasis mine):

The memo does not say who the foreign actors are, or what material was obtained, but it notes that secret information is defined as information that, if disclosed, could “reasonably be expected to cause serious damage to the national security.”

The committees say that no one appears to have been held accountable either criminally or administratively.

Relatedly, Fox News has obtained a May 2016 email from FBI investigator Peter Strzok — who also is criticized in the House memo for his anti-Trump texts with colleague Lisa Page. The email says that “we know foreign actors obtained access” to some Clinton emails, including at least one “secret” message “via compromises of the private email accounts” of Clinton staffers.

Why is that date significant?

Because former FBI Director James Comey released his statement on the FBI’s investigation of Hillary’s email in July 2016 and made no mention of that significant detail. He said, “We do assess that hostile actors gained access to the private commercial email accounts of people with whom Secretary Clinton was in regular contact from her personal account.”

Fox News reported this before the IG dropped his report, which concluded that Comey was “insubordinate,” but did not find evidence that “political bias” affected the investigation.

Strzok’s email shows that the agents discovered that foreign actors accessed at least one classified email. I’m sorry, but am I the only one who thinks these people accessing one classified email is one too many?

Well, Strzok wrote that the FBI had “no evidence classified information was ever shared with an unauthorized party.” In other words, Hillary and her staffers didn’t knowingly share this classified information with others like “a member of the media, an agent of a foreign power, a lover, etc.” But does it matter if it happened with or without intention?  Probably not:

In the House memo, lawmakers questioned whether the DOJ and FBI properly analyzed and interpreted the law surrounding mishandling of classified information.

“Officials from both agencies have created a perception they misinterpreted the Espionage Act by stating Secretary Clinton lacked the requisite ‘intent’ for charges to be filed,” the memo says, before pointing to statements by Comey that indicated a belief that intent was required — which the memo says ignored “meaningful aspects” of the law.

Strzok stressed that “it’s important to note that had these emails been sent on a system rather than a private one, it’s not clear that the FBI would currently have an open investigation.”

I would hope the FBI would open an investigation if anyone hacked and accessed any classified information on any server.

Last little bit. Strzok concluded that the officials need to discuss if Hillary’s “conduct rises to the legal definition of gross negligence.” We learned last December that it was Strzok that softened Comey’s description of Hillary’s handling of classified information. He changed it from “gross negligence” to “extremely careless.” From CNN:

The shift from “grossly negligent” to “extremely careless,” which may appear pedestrian at first glance, reflected a decision by the FBI that could have had potentially significant legal implications, as the federal law governing the mishandling of classified material establishes criminal penalties for “gross negligence.”

This is the definition of gross negligence:

A lack of care that demonstrates reckless disregard for the safety or lives of others, which is so great it appears to be a conscious violation of other people’s rights to safety. It is more than simple inadvertence, and can affect the amount of damages.

But no political bias, right Inspector General Michael Horowitz? Okay, bro.

Peter Strzok email about Clinton emails by Fox News on Scribd


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.