FBI Official Admits to Congress: The Clinton Case Was ‘Different in a Lot of Ways’

Screen Shot 2016-09-12 FBI Herring Senate Oversight

WASHINGTON, D.C. — House Oversight Committee member Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio got results Monday with his performance at a rare evening hearing to probe details of the FBI’s Hillary Clinton email investigation, which did not result in an indictment.

Just days after Breitbart News’ bombshell report on FBI Director James Comey’s crony-capitalist financial relationships, including his links to the Clinton Foundation, Jordan interrogated FBI acting assistant director for congressional affairs Jason Herring.

Herring admitted that the Clinton case was “different.”

Here is the transcript of the interrogation (emphasis added):

Jordan: Mr. Herring, was this case different? You said you’ve been around the FBI 17 years, you’re now the acting director for legislative affairs, was this case different?

Herring: I think this case is different in a lot of ways.

Jordan: A lot of ways.

Herring: I do.

Jordan: Can you tell us? Can you give me some – why? I know it’s different in a lot of ways. How about this difference: You ever have a case in your 17 years where the subject of your investigation’s husband meets with the attorney general just a couple days before you’re going to interview that individual in your investigation. You ever had that happen in your 17 years?

Herring: No, sir.

Jordan: That’s certainly different, isn’t it?

Herring: Yes, sir.

Jordan: Yeah. You ever have a case, in your 17 years – and we appreciate your service – you ever have a case where the attorney general announces publically that she’s gonna follow the recommendations of the FBI even though she has no idea what those recommendations are going to be … you ever have that happen in your 17 years?

Herring: Not on one of the cases I was assigned.

Jordan: Yeah. Well I don’t think it’s ever happened because the attorney general told me she’s never done that until this time. You ever have – in your 17 years – you ever have a director of the FBI, you ever have them do a big press conference, walk through all the wrong-doings of the person under investigation – you ever have that happen? A big press conference before you make this big announcement? Or normally the FBI just kind of announces whether they’re gonna prosecute or not, right? You ever seen that before?

Herring: I mean we’ve certainly had press conferences. Not quite like that one.

Jordan: Not quite like that one. That’s exactly right. And then have you ever had this: now maybe this happens, but Mr. Cummings said in his opening statement, “Republicans didn’t like the answers Mr. Comey gave.” Well that maybe true, but based on what Mr. Comey did last week where he sent a memo to you and all your colleagues, looks to me like a lot of former FBI agents, and maybe some even current ones, didn’t like some of the answers they got from this investigation. You ever seen that before? Mr. Comey says in this letter, “I explained to our alums, I’m OK if folks have a different view of this investigation.” So there’s obviously some folks who used to work in the Justice Department [who] didn’t like the outcome either. Now they may be Republicans like Mr. Cummings says, they may not be. So I’ve never seen that before either, have you, Mr. Herring?

Herring: Frequently we get messages from the director on a variety of things-

Jordan: Yeah. Two months after he makes the announcements he thinks it’s important to send a memo out, two months later, to all his employees saying, hey I’d better fill you in on some things here, why we did what we did, you ever have that happen two months after the fact?

Herring: I think often times he wants the employees to understand what’s going on in a full level of transparency both outside the Bureau and inside the Bureau – we’re a big agency-

Jordan: So two months later you get a memo-

Herring: 36 thousand or so employees-

Jordan: This case was different. But here’s the problem, Mr. Herring. It’s not supposed to be. It’s not supposed to be different. Everyone is supposed to be treated equally under the law. And I know deep down you know that. Your 17 years serving in our government – you know that, don’t you? Everyone’s supposed to be treated the same. And in this case, this individual was treated different. And everyone in this country knows it. And that’s why we’re having this hearing…


Please let us know if you're having issues with commenting.