secretary clinton to assume the documents were not classified. chairman, you raise ad question about whether secretary clinton's attorneys had security clearances. it is my understanding that they did. we can double check that. that is my understanding. we will double check that. going on, let me move to the next topic. you explained on tuesday that you were providing, quote an update on use of personal e-mail system during her time as secretary of state. you explained that you received a referral from inspector general of intelligence community on july 6, 2016. is that right? >> yes. >> today tens of thousands of secretary clinton's e-mails are probably available on state department's website. our staff had been reviewing e-mails that were retroactively determined to include classified information. based on this review, it appears

that these e-mails included more than 1,000 individuals who sent or received the information that has now redacted as classified. let me make that clear. about 1,000 people sent or received the same information that was contained in secretary clinton's e-mails and retroactively classified. were you aware of that? >> no. the number doesn't surprise me, though. >> why not? >> because this was, they were doing the business of the state department on the e-mail system. doesn't surprise me there would be lots of people on these chains. >> but you agree that we need to -- there is something needs to be done with regard to this classification stuff. because things are classified and then they are not classified. then they are retroactively classified. and does that go into your consideration when looking at a case like this?

>> i don't pay much attention to unclassified stuff because we are focussed on intent. so if somebody classified it later it is impossible that you formed intent around that because it wasn't classified at the time. i wasn't familiar with it before the investigation, but i don't spend a lot of time focussed on it on the course of a criminal investigation. >> i understand. we also reviewed who these people are and they include a host of very experienced career diplomats with many years of experience. so let me ask you this. when you receive this referal from the inspector general about secretary clinton's e-mails, did you also receive any referrals for any of the other 1,000 people who sent and received those e-mails? did you? >> no. i should stop there. within the scope of our investigation is a group of people closer to the secretary. we looked at their conduct. four or five of them. the hundreds of other whose may

have bip on the chains were not the subjects of investigation. >> i understand that secretary clinton is the only one running for president. it does not make sense that she would be singled out for referal for the fbi. do you agree with that? >> i don't think i agree with that. >> so let's go back to powell. do you think you ought to look at his situation? >> there has been no referal on them this case strikes me as very different and not an inappropriate referal from the inspector general sdplmpt i thank the gentleman. who was hillary clinton e-mailing that was hacked? >> i don't want to say in open forum. ip don't want to give insight into what we figured out.

>> fair enough. understood. was there any evidence of hillary clinton attempting to avoid compliance with the freedom of information act? >> there was not the subject of our criminal investigation. so i can't answer that sitting here. >> it is a violation of law, is it not? >> yes, my understanding is there are civil statutes that apply to that. >> let's put boundaries on this. what you didn't look at. you didn't look at whether or not there was an intention or the reality of noncompliance with freedom of information act. >> correct. >> you did not look at testimony that hillary clinton gave in the united states congress both the house and the senate? >> to see whether it was perjury? no. >> did you review and look at those transcripts as to the intent of your recommendation?

>> i'm sure my folks did. i did not. >> so this is an important point because i think those of us in congress knowing you got a criminal referral from an inspector general thought that you were also looking at whether or not hillary clinton provided false testimony which is a crime to the congress. but you didn't look at that. >> correct. >> as i said, i'm confident my folks looked at the statements trying to understand the circumstances around the situation. >> can you confirm that? >> maybe i'm missing this but i don't think we got a referring from congressional committees. >> it was inspector general that initiated this. >> did the -- the fact that hillary clinton refused to be interviewed by the inspector general, what did that say to you about intent?

>> at least for criminal investigation not particularly jermaine. >> are you familiar -- there is a website, lots of government agencies have websites. the state department has a website, state.gov. and they have a youtube site. videos that are uploaded to a youtube site, would those be considered federal records? >> i don't know. >> so they are paid for by federal dollars. they are maintained by federal employees. would that not be a federal record? >> i don't know. i'm sure there is an expert who can answer that in two seconds. >> we have kept you here a long time. i want to follow up on that. is the fbi still investigating hillary clinton's aides? >> no. the department of justice declined on all of those who

were subjects communicate wg her through that e-mail system. >> what recommendations did you make about her aides? >> same. we didn't recommend anybody be prosecuted on those facts. >> if you can help us understand who precisely had been ruled out for prosecution. >> sure. >> did you look at the clinton foundation? >> i'm not going to comment on the existence or nonexistence of other investigations. >> was the clinton foundation tied into this investigation? >> i'm not going to answer that. >> the server that was set up in her home was originally set up by, you said, former president bill clinton. >> correct. >> do you know who paid for that? >> i don't sitting here. >> okay. i'll have equal time for my

colleague and friend. >> let me go two minutes for my point and three to mr. lynch. >> thank you. we are talking about hacking. and so on this committee we are very much interested in cyber security. we review a lot of major hacks that are going on. just recently i would say in the last 18 months we have had major hack february of 2016 at the department of homeland security and the fbi. we had a hacking group, the site intelligence group reported that a group called crackers with attitude had hacked 9,000 employees data from department of homeland security including names, e-mail addresses, locations, telephone numbers.

20,000 fbi workers. we had another hack direct evidence of those, another hack at opm of 4.2 million current and former federal employees their information had been stolen including social security numbers which are not redacted. we had irs in may 2015 200,000 attempted and 100,000 were successful. we had state department announced breach of its computer systems after infiltration forced the agency to shut down classification system. we had united states postal service, 800,000 postal employees, 2.9 million customers. the white house, washington post reported back in 2014 that the

white house computer was hacked. national oceanic administration. we had verizon, health systems, thousands and thousands and thousands of employees, anthem health care, sony pictures, staples, home depot, jp morgan, community health systems, target, tjx, all of these we have direct evidence, millions and millions of people their accounts being hacked. any direct evidence that hillary clinton's e-mails were hacked? >> no. >> okay. i have no further questions. i yield back. >> director, we are about at the end. i'm going to do a concluding statement and then i think the

chairman will. i want to go back to something that ms. coleman said a little earlier. as an african-american man in this country, 66 years old, moving towards the twilight of my life, we cannot allow black men to continue to be slaughtered. this morning i woke up to my wife literally crying watching the tape of this guy alton sterling in baton rouge and then she looked at the one for castille near minneapolis. i hope you watch them. it's something wrong with this picture. and don't get me wrong. i am a lawyer. i support police. i know how important police are.

i know there are so many great folks, but mr. director, if you do nothing else in your 2,000 plus days left, you have got to help us get ahold of this issue. it is so painful. i can't begin to tell you. and so i don't want -- i have been fortunate in my life. i have been very fortunate that i have not been harmed by the police, but i have been stopped 50 million times. with regard to this hearing i want to thank you again. as i listen to you you said something that i will never forget. and for some reason it gave me a chill. you said there are two things that are most important to me, two things. you said my family and my

reputation. my family and my reputation. and i don't know whether your family is watching this, but i hope that they are as proud of you as i am. because you are the epitome of what a public servant is all about. sacrificing over and over and over again, trying to do the right thing, sometimes coming under ridicule, but yet still doing the right thing. so i hope that they are proud of you. the second thing i hope is that no matter what has happened in this hearing, i hope that you know that your reputation is still in tact. so i conclude by summarizing that i think some of our key findings today, first director

testified that his entire team of 15 to 20 fbi investigators and analysts unanimously agree on the recommendation not to prosecute secretary clinton. second, director comey made crystal clear that republican claims, some of the talking heads claims of bias are completely false. testified that he would treat john doe the same way he would treat hillary clinton and that he was forcefulen that point. third, on the claim that secretary clinton sent or received e-mails that were marked as classified, that claim has been significantly under cut. those documents were not classified and those markings were not proper. finally, republicans repeatedly cried foul about a double standard when it comes to secretary clinton's e-mails.

but director comey testified the real double standard would have been to prosecute her with this completely inadequate evidence. again, director, i thank you. but i thank somebody else. i thank and having practiced law for many years and having dealt with the fbi on many cases, i want to thank the people who work with you because it's not just -- this is not just about you. this is not just about secretary clinton. when we are addressing you the whole cad ray of people who give their blood, sweat and tears to protect us as americans. and i just want to thank them because sometimes i think they are forgotten, unseen, unnoticed, unappreciated and unapplauded. but today i applaud them and i

thank you. thank you very much and i yield back. >> i thank the gentleman. i concur with the idea that every fbi agent i have met make us proud and work hard and serve overseas. can't thank them enough for what they do. i hope that is part of the message that we carry back. i cannot thank you personally enough. you on a personal level for your accessibility, your ability to get on the phone with me the same day that you make your announcement and then in rapid fire when i said to you what day is best for you and you said thursday and here we are and doing it. i wish all government employees would have that attitude and approach. i really do. i can't thank you enough. i look forward to working with you and your staff as we move

forward in getting this documentation, things you can't share publically and others. it is the intention of the committee -- i told mr. cummings that we would come back after votes. votes have been pushed back a bit. so what i would like to to is go into recess and then start with our second panel. committee stands in recess until five minutes from now. thank you again, director comey.

after the hearing wrapped up yesterday, the state department announced it would reopen the review of hillary clinton's private email address and how

she handled classified material. the candidate will make a campaign stop with vice president joe biden in scranton, pennsylvania. we'll bring it to you live, noon eastern on c-span 2. our road to the white house coverage continues live with the democratic party's platform committee in orlando today starting at 3:00 p.m. eastern and continuing tomorrow at 10:00 a.m. eastern. members will debate the platform for this year's elections. live coverage on c-span, the c-span radio app and c-span.org. >> next up, "washington journal" is live, followed by the u.s. house that returns live at 9:00 a.m. eastern to debate a bill to combat opioid abuse. the platform committee meets live from orlando. now, your reaction to last night's shootings in dallas. we'll talk with texas

congresswoman, and later, community activist and black lives matter activist. now, your comments by phone and social media live on "washington journal."