WASHINGTON ― News erupted Monday that in the latest batch of Hillary Clinton email documents, there was talk of a “quid pro quo” offered in relation to re-classifying one of Clinton’s emails.
But there are a couple of problems with the latest eruption.
The first is that even before the news was out, the FBI released a statement saying there was no such agreement. The second is that the email in question appears to be public already, and was posted online by the State Department in May of 2015.
But to back up for a minute: The new trove of documents that sparked the latest Clinton conspiracy outbreak was the FBI’s summaries of interviews from its investigation into whether classified information was mishandled in the course of Clinton running her electronic communications through a private email server in the basement of her home.
The FBI concluded that Clinton’s setup was extremely careless, but there was nothing there to prosecute. The notes released Monday come from the investigation. (See around pages 25-29 for the relevant notes.)
In them, one retired agent recounts getting a call in May or June of 2015 from Under Secretary of State Pat Kennedy, who wanted to argue about the FBI’s particular classification on an email, apparently about possible arrests in Benghazi, Libya, related to the 2012 attacks there. Kennedy had a different take on whether the email should be classified the way the FBI thought it should be classified. The agent, according to the notes, had been trying to get a hold of senior State Department officials to get more FBI agents moved to slots overseas, apparently in Iraq. So he told Kennedy he’d look into the classification if Kennedy would look into the slots.
Another agent, who was involved in debating classification levels, got a call from the first agent asking that the email be declassified. The second agent, who works in the FBI’s records management division, told investigators he thought there was a quid pro quo demand.
Ultimately, the FBI did not change its opinion, the email was not re-classified, and it was posted.
State Department spokesman Mark Toner reacted angrily to suggestions that there was some sort of exchange beyond an FBI agent taking an opportunity to address an unrelated need when he got the chance.
“Any ― really ― assertion that this was somehow a tit for tat or quid pro quo exchange in that manner frankly is insulting,” Toner said at his regular briefing.
Still, the idea that Kennedy had tried to change a classification (presumably to make it look better for Clinton), sparked two members of Congress to call for Secretary of State John Kerry to fire Kennedy.
“We believe that Under Secretary Kennedy may have inappropriately influenced the review of Secretary Clinton’s emails,” wrote House Oversight Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) and Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.), chairman of the House Inteligence Committee.
“That’s their prerogative, but I can tell you that Patrick Kennedy is going to stay at his job,” Toner responded.
In addition to that, the FBI had already offered its interpretation of its agents’ notes over the weekend before the full file was released.
“A senior State Department official requested the FBI re-review that email to determine whether it was in fact classified or whether it might be protected from release under a different FOIA exemption,” the statement said. “A now-retired FBI official, who was not part of the subsequent Clinton investigation, told the State Department official that they would look into the matter. Having been previously unsuccessful in attempts to speak with the senior State official, during the same conversation, the FBI official asked the State Department official if they would address a pending, unaddressed FBI request for space for additional FBI employees assigned abroad.”
It goes on to note that the FBI ultimately decided it liked its idea of the email’s secrecy level better than Kennedy’s.
“The classification of the email was not changed, and it remains classified today,” the statement said. “Although there was never a quid pro quo, these allegations were nonetheless referred to the appropriate officials for review.”
Toner noted Monday that the investigation into the whole mess is now closed.
HUFFPOST READERS: What’s happening in your state or district? The Huffington Post wants to know about all the campaign ads, mailers, robocalls, candidate appearances and other interesting campaign news happening by you. Email any tips, videos, audio files or photos to scoops@huffingtonpost.com.