Democratic Lawmakers Accuse IGs of Bias in Clinton Email Probe

In a rare criticism of two inspectors general, seven Democratic lawmakers wrote to the State Department and Intelligence Community watchdogs accusing them of bias and errors in their review of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server.

In a March 9 letter to State IG Steve Linick and Intelligence Community IG Charles McCullough II, four senators and three House members cited a recent news report that a “potential whistleblower” in the State Department IG’s office had accused Linick of an “anti-Clinton” bias. They also posed a series of questions to the Intel Community IG exploring whether he and his State counterpart take different approaches to determining what documents get classified.

“We write today to emphasize that, pursuant to the Inspector General Act of 1978, we expect all inspector general investigations – including your review into the email practices of the past five Secretaries of State – to be impartial, independent, and diligent,” said the letter signed by Sens. Diane Feinstein of California, Patrick Leahy of Vermont, Tom Carper of Delaware and Ben Cardin of Maryland, as well as Reps. Adam Schiff of California, Eliot Engel of New York, and Elijah Cummings of Maryland.

“Second, a number of allegations about the classification of specific emails made by the office of the Intelligence Community Inspector General appear to have been reached in error and/or contained inaccuracies,” the lawmakers wrote. “For example, on August 11, 2015, the IC IG transmitted to several congressional offices copies of some emails containing the purported classified information. Since then, it has become clear that at least one of the referenced emails did not contain classified information and the initial claim that other emails were highly classified was reversed.”

The letter seeks answers from the IGs at a time when Hillary Clinton is getting closer to the Democratic nomination for president and the Republican National Committee has joined other conservative groups in filing lawsuits demanding the release of Clinton’s past emails and text messages. (Both IGs were appointed by President Obama.)

The lawmakers also questioned the qualifications of the IGs in classification decision making. “Classification determinations are complex, subjective, often in dispute between different agencies, and are not normally within the purview of Inspectors General,” they wrote. “In fact, inspectors general are not even mentioned in Executive Order 13526, which establishes the rules for classifying, safeguarding, and declassifying national security information.  We are concerned that the review process being undertaken by the two inspector general offices has not taken these complexities or the interagency differences on each email into account.”

They asked that “any future reviews and releases be 100 percent accurate, impartial and complete.  We also expect written communications regarding your offices’ review to be precise and impartial,” they said. “Finally, any information provided to Congress, whether verbally or in draft or preliminary form, should be provided on a bipartisan basis and conveyed to both majority and minority staff at the same time.” 

Already, the lawmakers added, “this review has been too politicized.” The questions they asked addressed procedures for maintaining integrity in investigations, whether anyone on the IG staffs leaked material to the news media about the Clinton probes, the methodologies for reviewing Clinton’s emails, and whether either office had shared information on the investigations with Republican lawmakers without the Democrats being aware.

One of the signers, Engel, ranking member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, had separately written to the State IG asking that one of his deputies, Emilia DiSanto, recuse herself from the Clinton investigation because she previously worked for Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, a frequent Clinton antagonist and booster of inspectors general.

Doug Welty, a spokesman for the State IG’s office, said in an emailed statement that “partisan politics play no role in OIG’s work.  At all times, State OIG operates as an independent organization, consistent with the law. Our work will continue to be unbiased, objective, and fact-based. We are now reviewing the email practices of the current and last four Secretaries of State, not just Secretary Clinton. Any suggestion that the office is biased against any particular Secretary is completely false. Our work to date shows our commitment to the facts wherever they lead.”

As examples of that neutrality, he cited his office’s report on the discovery of classified material in State’s archives of former secretaries Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice. And “in our review of Diplomatic Security investigations, we investigated allegations of undue influence by Secretary Clinton’s Chief of Staff, Cheryl Mills, and reported the allegations were unsubstantiated.”

On the charge that the investigation is political, a Grassley spokeswoman said in an email, “Inspectors general work hard to stay out of politics. Their credibility and effectiveness depend on being independent, so accusations of political bias are serious charges to make, especially without any evidence. The current State Department inspector general was nominated by President Obama twice, first for the Federal Housing Finance Agency and then the State Department,” she said.

By contrast, “Secretary Clinton never had a permanent, Senate-confirmed inspector general during her entire tenure as secretary. Maybe independent oversight looks like a political conspiracy to those who aren’t used to it.”

On the charge that a onetime Grassley staffer is a secret leaker, she said, “Sen. Grassley has had one confidential source on State Department personnel practices, and that source was not his former staffer. That fact is well-known to several House and Senate Democratic staffers who joined Grassley’s staff for a meeting with the source. Impugning reputations with innuendo and speculation is irresponsible and inexcusable.”

The lawmakers sent copies of their letter to Secretary of State John Kerry, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, and Justice Department IG Michael Horowitz, who chairs the Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency Integrity Committee.

A spokeswoman for the Intel Community IG had no comment.