Press Releases

Yesterday, in a letter to U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch, the House Judiciary Committee’s majority alleged that newly-released FBI interview notes “raise serious questions about whether Undersecretary of State Patrick Kennedy violated federal laws . . . by offering a ‘quid pro quo’ to the FBI.”  The interview notes contain no factual basis for these claims:

• As early as January 2016, the Inspector General for the Department of State concluded that there was no undue or inappropriate influence in the review and classification of Secretary Clinton’s emails. 

• The FBI released a public statement that categorically rejects the accusation, noting that “[a]lthough there was never a quid pro quo, these allegations were nonetheless referred to the appropriate officials for review.” 

• The now-retired FBI agent who spoke to Undersecretary Kennedy has told reporters that the two matters—staffing overseas posts and the classification review of Secretary Clinton’s emails—were wholly unrelated discussions, and no exchange or deal linking the matters was ever proposed.

• FBI files released weeks ago explained that Undersecretary Kennedy “‘categorically rejected’ allegations that he attempted [to] influence FOIA markings to protect and/or mask classified information.”

House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI), today released the following statement:

“The FBI, the Department of State, and virtually every individual with firsthand knowledge of the pertinent facts have flatly denied allegations of any attempt to arrange a quid pro quo on Secretary Clinton’s behalf.  The FBI looked into the matter and found no evidence of any wrongdoing whatsoever.  There is no new factual information in these interview notes that would lead us to believe otherwise. 

“The majority will find few answers in unsupported and unsubstantiated speculation.  I hope that when we return to Washington in November, there is room for more substantive discussion.”