This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/30/us/politics/comey-clinton-email-justice.html
The article has changed 10 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 8 | Version 9 |
|---|---|
| Justice Dept. Strongly Discouraged Comey on Move in Clinton Email Case | Justice Dept. Strongly Discouraged Comey on Move in Clinton Email Case |
| (about 1 hour later) | |
| WASHINGTON — The day before the F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, sent a letter to Congress announcing that new evidence had been discovered that might be related to the completed Hillary Clinton email investigation, the Justice Department strongly discouraged the step and told him that he would be breaking with longstanding policy, three law enforcement officials said on Saturday. | |
| Senior Justice Department officials did not move to stop him from sending the letter, officials said, but they did everything short of it, pointing to policies against talking about current criminal investigations or being seen as meddling in elections. | Senior Justice Department officials did not move to stop him from sending the letter, officials said, but they did everything short of it, pointing to policies against talking about current criminal investigations or being seen as meddling in elections. |
| That Mr. Comey moved ahead despite those protestations underscores the unusual nature of Friday’s revelations, which added a dramatic twist to the final days of the presidential campaign. His action reignited a firestorm that Mrs. Clinton believed she had put behind her when the F.B.I. decided in July not to charge anyone in the investigation into the handling of classified information on her private email server. | That Mr. Comey moved ahead despite those protestations underscores the unusual nature of Friday’s revelations, which added a dramatic twist to the final days of the presidential campaign. His action reignited a firestorm that Mrs. Clinton believed she had put behind her when the F.B.I. decided in July not to charge anyone in the investigation into the handling of classified information on her private email server. |
| Mr. Comey’s letter did not reopen that inquiry, even as he promised to review the new information, which was discovered in an unrelated investigation into the disgraced former congressman Anthony D. Weiner. | Mr. Comey’s letter did not reopen that inquiry, even as he promised to review the new information, which was discovered in an unrelated investigation into the disgraced former congressman Anthony D. Weiner. |
| Senior Justice Department officials, career prosecutors and even some at the F.B.I. were at a loss on Saturday as to what would happen next. Would Mr. Comey provide a blow-by-blow accounting of the F.B.I.’s steps until Election Day? Did he plan further announcements? Or did he intend, after shaking up the election with his letter, to remain silent about the facts until the presidential votes had been tallied? | Senior Justice Department officials, career prosecutors and even some at the F.B.I. were at a loss on Saturday as to what would happen next. Would Mr. Comey provide a blow-by-blow accounting of the F.B.I.’s steps until Election Day? Did he plan further announcements? Or did he intend, after shaking up the election with his letter, to remain silent about the facts until the presidential votes had been tallied? |
| The F.B.I. offered no comment, and Justice Department officials said they had no idea what Mr. Comey saw as his next move. Justice Department officials were particularly puzzled about why Mr. Comey had alerted Congress — and by extension, the public — before agents even began reading the newly discovered emails to determine whether they contained classified information or added new facts to the case. | The F.B.I. offered no comment, and Justice Department officials said they had no idea what Mr. Comey saw as his next move. Justice Department officials were particularly puzzled about why Mr. Comey had alerted Congress — and by extension, the public — before agents even began reading the newly discovered emails to determine whether they contained classified information or added new facts to the case. |
| Law enforcement officials have begun the process to get court authority to read the emails, officials said. How soon they will get that is unclear, but there is no chance that the review will be completed before Election Day, several law enforcement officials said. Many of the emails are most likely copies of messages that the F.B.I. has already read, said the officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to comment publicly. | Law enforcement officials have begun the process to get court authority to read the emails, officials said. How soon they will get that is unclear, but there is no chance that the review will be completed before Election Day, several law enforcement officials said. Many of the emails are most likely copies of messages that the F.B.I. has already read, said the officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to comment publicly. |
| Despite the Justice Department’s concerns, Mr. Comey felt obligated to send the letter. But it opened him up to fierce criticism not only from Democrats but also from current and former officials at the F.B.I. and the Justice Department, including Republicans. | Despite the Justice Department’s concerns, Mr. Comey felt obligated to send the letter. But it opened him up to fierce criticism not only from Democrats but also from current and former officials at the F.B.I. and the Justice Department, including Republicans. |
| “There’s a longstanding policy of not doing anything that could influence an election,” said George J. Terwilliger III, a deputy attorney general under President George Bush. “Those guidelines exist for a reason. Sometimes, that makes for hard decisions. But bypassing them has consequences.” | “There’s a longstanding policy of not doing anything that could influence an election,” said George J. Terwilliger III, a deputy attorney general under President George Bush. “Those guidelines exist for a reason. Sometimes, that makes for hard decisions. But bypassing them has consequences.” |
| He added, “There’s a difference between being independent and flying solo.” | He added, “There’s a difference between being independent and flying solo.” |
| After reports surfaced late last month that Mr. Weiner had sent illicit text messages to a 15-year-old girl in North Carolina, top prosecutors in Charlotte and Manhattan jockeyed for the case. Senior officials in the Justice Department decided that if there were a prosecution, it would take place in New York under the supervision of the United States attorney there, Preet Bharara. | After reports surfaced late last month that Mr. Weiner had sent illicit text messages to a 15-year-old girl in North Carolina, top prosecutors in Charlotte and Manhattan jockeyed for the case. Senior officials in the Justice Department decided that if there were a prosecution, it would take place in New York under the supervision of the United States attorney there, Preet Bharara. |
| Almost immediately, it became clear to investigators that the Weiner case might reignite the Clinton inquiry. Mr. Weiner’s estranged wife, Huma Abedin, is a top adviser to Mrs. Clinton, and F.B.I. agents in the earlier investigation had interviewed her and reviewed her emails looking for classified information. | Almost immediately, it became clear to investigators that the Weiner case might reignite the Clinton inquiry. Mr. Weiner’s estranged wife, Huma Abedin, is a top adviser to Mrs. Clinton, and F.B.I. agents in the earlier investigation had interviewed her and reviewed her emails looking for classified information. |
| On Oct. 3, F.B.I. agents seized several electronic devices from Mr. Weiner: a laptop, his iPhone and an iPad that was in large measure used by his 4-year-old son to watch cartoons, a person with knowledge of the matter said. Days later, F.B.I. agents also confiscated a Wi-Fi router that could identify any other devices that had been used, the person said. | On Oct. 3, F.B.I. agents seized several electronic devices from Mr. Weiner: a laptop, his iPhone and an iPad that was in large measure used by his 4-year-old son to watch cartoons, a person with knowledge of the matter said. Days later, F.B.I. agents also confiscated a Wi-Fi router that could identify any other devices that had been used, the person said. |
| While searching the laptop, the agents discovered the existence of tens of thousands of emails, some of them sent between Ms. Abedin and other Clinton aides, according to senior law enforcement officials. It is not clear if Ms. Abedin downloaded the emails to the laptop or if they were automatically backed up there. The emails dated back years, the officials said. Ms. Abedin has testified that she did not routinely delete her emails. | While searching the laptop, the agents discovered the existence of tens of thousands of emails, some of them sent between Ms. Abedin and other Clinton aides, according to senior law enforcement officials. It is not clear if Ms. Abedin downloaded the emails to the laptop or if they were automatically backed up there. The emails dated back years, the officials said. Ms. Abedin has testified that she did not routinely delete her emails. |
| Because of the age of the emails, many could be outside the scope of the Clinton inquiry, investigators said. And while many are probably duplicative, some would be worth reading, the F.B.I. concluded. | Because of the age of the emails, many could be outside the scope of the Clinton inquiry, investigators said. And while many are probably duplicative, some would be worth reading, the F.B.I. concluded. |
| In conversations this month, senior Justice Department and F.B.I. officials agreed that the matter was worth pursuing. By law, though, agents and prosecutors in the Clinton investigation could not immediately read the new emails without court authority. | In conversations this month, senior Justice Department and F.B.I. officials agreed that the matter was worth pursuing. By law, though, agents and prosecutors in the Clinton investigation could not immediately read the new emails without court authority. |
| The authorities decided only recently to seek that approval. They do not know whether the emails contain classified information or, if they do, whether that would change their determination that nobody should be charged with mishandling it. | The authorities decided only recently to seek that approval. They do not know whether the emails contain classified information or, if they do, whether that would change their determination that nobody should be charged with mishandling it. |
| So Justice Department officials were surprised on Thursday afternoon to receive notice of Mr. Comey’s intention to send the letter to Congress. The letter, issued as early voting was underway in some states, guaranteed a new round of questions for Mrs. Clinton just before Election Day. | |
| The Justice Department and the F.B.I. have a longstanding policy against discussing current criminal investigations. Another Justice Department policy, restated each election cycle, declares that politics should play no role in investigative decisions. Both Democratic and Republican administrations have interpreted that policy broadly to cover any steps that might give even an impression of partisanship. | The Justice Department and the F.B.I. have a longstanding policy against discussing current criminal investigations. Another Justice Department policy, restated each election cycle, declares that politics should play no role in investigative decisions. Both Democratic and Republican administrations have interpreted that policy broadly to cover any steps that might give even an impression of partisanship. |
| “We must be particularly sensitive to safeguarding the department’s reputation for fairness, neutrality and nonpartisanship,” said a 2012 memo from the attorney general’s office that restated the policy. | “We must be particularly sensitive to safeguarding the department’s reputation for fairness, neutrality and nonpartisanship,” said a 2012 memo from the attorney general’s office that restated the policy. |
| But although Mr. Comey told Congress this summer that the Clinton investigation was complete, he believed that if word of the new emails leaked out — and it was sure to leak out, he concluded — he risked being accused of misleading Congress and the public ahead of an election, colleagues said. | |
| Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch did not directly speak with Mr. Comey about the matter, officials said, but senior Justice Department officials sent word of her concerns. Though Ms. Lynch is technically Mr. Comey’s boss, she, too, faced a dilemma. If she ordered Mr. Comey not to send the letter, it could appear that she was trying to withhold information from Congress. | |
| After hearing the Justice Department’s argument, Mr. Comey concluded that the ramifications of not telling Congress far outweighed concerns about the department guidelines, one senior law enforcement official said. | After hearing the Justice Department’s argument, Mr. Comey concluded that the ramifications of not telling Congress far outweighed concerns about the department guidelines, one senior law enforcement official said. |
| On Friday, Mr. Comey sent Congress the letter, which said emails had surfaced in a case unrelated to the Clinton case. Mr. Comey said that the F.B.I. would review the emails to determine if they improperly contained classified information, adding that the emails “appear to be pertinent.” | |
| It was the latest example of a sometimes strained relationship between the Justice Department and Mr. Comey, who — on issues of race, encryption, policing and, most notably, the Clinton investigation — has branded himself as someone who operates outside Washington’s typical chain of command. | |
| The letter rankled Mrs. Clinton’s supporters in part because Mr. Comey has been circumspect in his remarks about another federal investigation, this one involving allegations of Russian meddling in the election. American officials believe that Russian intelligence agents are behind the hacking of Democratic National Committee emails, which have embarrassed the Clinton campaign. | |
| Senior Democrats have called on the F.B.I. to investigate whether any of Donald J. Trump’s aides are colluding with Russia. Some of his aides have ties to Russian interests, but they have denied any wrongdoing. | Senior Democrats have called on the F.B.I. to investigate whether any of Donald J. Trump’s aides are colluding with Russia. Some of his aides have ties to Russian interests, but they have denied any wrongdoing. |
| While Mr. Comey told Congress last month that he would not confirm the existence of any investigation into people associated with Mr. Trump, he said he felt compelled to discuss details of the Clinton investigation because it involved “exceptional circumstances where the public needed information.” | While Mr. Comey told Congress last month that he would not confirm the existence of any investigation into people associated with Mr. Trump, he said he felt compelled to discuss details of the Clinton investigation because it involved “exceptional circumstances where the public needed information.” |
| Matthew Miller, a Democrat and former Justice Department spokesman who has criticized Mr. Comey’s handling of the email investigation, said the F.B.I. director should not pick and choose when to follow the guidelines. | |
| “You can’t apply the usual standard to one candidate and an entirely different set of rules for the other,” he said. | “You can’t apply the usual standard to one candidate and an entirely different set of rules for the other,” he said. |