The newly released FBI interview reports show that it was a Bureau official who initially suggested he would look into changing the classification of a State Department email that was part of the Hillary Clinton email probe, if Undersecretary Patrick Kennedy would allow an increase of FBI agents in Iraq.
And it was a second FBI official who felt “pressured” by his FBI colleague, not by Kennedy, to make that classification change, as shown by the reports.
It was also that second FBI official who described the deal as a “quid pro quo” without apparently knowing that it was his colleague who suggested it, according to the reports which themselves contain no indication that Kennedy had made or even discussed such an offer.
Late yesterday, The Washington Post published a story after interviewing Brian McCauley, the former FBI Assistant Director for International Operations who was the author of the alleged “quid pro quo” offer. He described it as a favor for the favor Kennedy was seeking but one dropped when he learned the contents of the e-mail involved.
The State Department yesterday released a statement from Kennedy that said, “There was no quid pro quo, nor was there any bargaining. At no point in our conversation was I under the impression we were bargaining.”
One only has to read the two original FBI so-called 302 reports – summaries by agents of their interviews – and put them in context to see how these reports from 2015 have been distorted by the media, Trump supporters, and the presidential candidate himself.
Many stories have attributed the “quid pro quo” idea to Kennedy as part of his attempt to get the FBI to change the classification the Bureau had put on one e-mail that State considered unclassified.
That idea took root last Friday, when Rep. Jason Chafez (R-Utah), who had been briefed on the FBI reports, which had been delivered that day to the House Oversight and Intelligence Committees, told Fox News that the FBI reports contained “an alleged quid pro quo” involving Kennedy, where “in return for altering classification, the possibility of additional slots for the FBI at missions overseas was discussed.”
That inaccurate interpretation then expanded when the actual two FBI reports, totaling five pages, were released publicly Monday among 100 pages of other FBI reports involving the Hillary Clinton e-mails and her private server. Many of the FBI-related stories, such as one in Politico Monday, headlined: “State Dept. official accused of offering ‘quid pro quo’ in Clinton email scandal.”
The pro-Trump New York Post reported that Kennedy “pitched” the deal to an unnamed agent allegedly as part of an effort to back up Clinton’s claim that she did not send or receive classified documents on the server in her Westchester home.
The Republicans and Trump campaign jumped on the issue with the candidate telling a rally in Green Bay, Wisconsin, Monday night, “The FBI documents show that Under-Secretary of State Patrick Kennedy made the request for altering classification as part of a 'quid pro quo,' in other words a deal." Trump followed that with, "This is felony corruption. Under-Secretary Kennedy needs to resign."
It is true that in late May or early June 2015, according to a September 3, 2015 FBI interview report, Kennedy telephoned an official at the FBI’s International Operations Division, with whom he had done business, to seek help in changing a Secret classification that the Bureau’s Document Management Division had placed in an email that State had considered unclassified. The document was among several State sent to various agencies at that time for clearance among 296 that were to be sent the Capitol Hill.
This FBI International Operations official said Kennedy told him he wanted to give the document a classification “that would allow him to archive the document in the basement of DoS [the State Department] never to be seen again,” according to the FBI report.
It was then, according to the FBI report, “Not knowing the e-mail’s content, [the FBI International Operations official] told Kennedy he would look into the e-mail matter if Kennedy would provide authority concerning the FBI’s request to increase its personnel in Iraq.”
The FBI report gave no indication of any response from Kennedy.
A second FBI report released Monday and related to this matter recorded an interview that took place on July 30, 2015, actually more than a month BEFORE the September interview report. In fact, it was this earlier interview that obviously generated that one.
It was the interview of the FBI official in Records Management Division who was in charge of the classification of the document, whose classification Kennedy wanted to change.
The FBI Records Management official said that six weeks earlier he had received five e-mails from State for clearance and one “appeared classified.” He forwarded that one to the FBI Counterterrorism Division for its determination. That division considered it classified as Secret and that result was sent back to State.
Sometime thereafter, the FBI Records Management official said he received a call from the FBI International Operations official about that email. He described his FBI colleague as the one “who ‘pressured’ him to change the classified e-mail to unclassified,” according to the FBI interview report.
In describing the call, the Records Management official said his colleague told him Kennedy “had asked his assistance in altering the email’s classification in exchange for a ‘quid pro quo,’” according to the FBI report. His colleague then described the deal as “in exchange for marking the e-mail unclassified, State would reciprocate by allowing the FBI to place more Agents in countries where they are presently forbidden.”
There was no mention during this phone call by the FBI International Operations official that the so-called “quid pro quo” idea was originally his idea, but in fact it appeared to be the other way around.
Apparently it was this interview, that took place before the other, which triggered the FBI to then interview the former FBI International Operations official, who by that time had retired.
When the first stories about the so-called “quid pro quo” appeared over the weekend, the FBI put out a statement that both the State Department and FBI told journalists that no such deal had been discussed after the FBI International Operations official put it to Kennedy.
Kennedy would make another attempt to get an FBI explanation of its classifying the document – and seek to change it – at a later inter-agency meeting, according to the FBI document, but the Secret classification remained.
The FBI has since said the allegation of a “quid pro quo” has been “referred to the appropriate officials for review.”
Perhaps President Barack Obama summed it up best when asked about the issue yesterday. “Based on what we have seen, heard, learned, some of the more sensational implications or appearances…aren't based on actual events and based on what actually happened.”
It shows what can happen when participants deal loosely with the facts and the media runs a story without checking first with the individuals involved and the materials that are available for review.
