FBI Contradicts the Dubious Report Pushed by Trump About Hillary Clinton's Private Email Server

FBI Contradicts the Dubious Report Pushed by Trump About Hillary Clinton's Private Email Server

Somehow, almost two years after the 2016 election, President Donald Trump and the right wing are still obsessed with Hillary Clinton's personal email server.


On Tuesday night, Trump tweeted about a report from the conservative site the Daily Caller that purported to reveal new developments in the overhyped controversy surrounding the server.

"Report just out: 'China hacked Hillary Clinton’s private Email Server,'" Trump wrote. "Are they sure it wasn’t Russia (just kidding!)? What are the odds that the FBI and DOJ are right on top of this? Actually, a very big story. Much classified information!"

That article, published Monday, claimed that a Chinese-owned company had hacked Clinton's servers an obtained copies of nearly every email, citing two "sources briefed on the matter." Of course, such a scandal in the Trump administration would barely make a splash in the frantic news cycle, but conservative news outlets have covered the issue ferociously for years.

And even this supposedly new development has been contradicted former FBI Director James Comey's previous claim that there was no evidence that Clinton's server was penetrated. On Wednesday, officials speaking on behalf of the bureau told NBC News that this was still the case.

"The FBI has not found any evidence the (Clinton) servers were compromised," an official told the outlet. The recently released Justice Department Inspector General report examining the handling of the Clinton email investigation likewise presented no further evidence about any hacking of the server.

Further adding to the bizarre spectacle, Trump tweeted Wednesday morning: "When you see 'anonymous source,' stop reading the story, it is fiction!"

But the Daily Caller story he had cited the night before referenced anonymous sources.

The White House did not respond to a request for comment on these discrepancies or why the president is relying on information from news outlets rather than the DOJ itself.

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. AlterNet’s journalists work tirelessly to counter the traditional corporate media narrative. We’re here seven days a week, 365 days a year. And we’re proud to say that we’ve been bringing you the real, unfiltered news for 20 years—longer than any other progressive news site on the Internet.

It’s through the generosity of our supporters that we’re able to share with you all the underreported news you need to know. Independent journalism is increasingly imperiled; ads alone can’t pay our bills. AlterNet counts on readers like you to support our coverage. Did you enjoy content from David Cay Johnston, Common Dreams, Raw Story and Robert Reich? Opinion from Salon and Jim Hightower? Analysis by The Conversation? Then join the hundreds of readers who have supported AlterNet this year.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure AlterNet remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to AlterNet, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

DonateDonate by credit card

Close

Don't Sit on the Sidelines of History. Join Alternet All Access and Go Ad-Free. Support Honest Journalism.