it's possible but -- >> did they actually type open parenthesis, c, close parenthesis and end the paragraph. >> no, you wouldn't accidentally type that. someone down the chain -- >> so my question is someone down the chain being investigated? because they had the intent clearly if they had the sophistication which hillary clinton you insinuate may have lacked. if they had the sophistication to know what this bore marking was, they had to have the intent to recreate it or the intent to cut, copy, paste from a secure system to unsecure system. wouldn't that be correct? >> potentially. but there's not an open criminal investigation of that person way down the chain. >> shouldn't there be? >> a criminal investigation? >> an investigation if there's intent which is what you -- i mean, and i think you may be reasonable in requiring that threshold. don't we treat everybody the same whether they're top of the chain or bottom of the chain? >> sure, if you want to if the conduct is the same. we did not rlly investigate whoever started that chain and put the "c" on those paragraphs. >> i would suggest

they are still pretty cold and )-right-parenthesis-right with a should be this time of year. the fog yesterday was a thin ribbon but it does look thicker here across the marina and sonoma coast. that will lead into a cooler pattern west of ten in oakland airport hayward. the key though is out of the delta. twenty-three and 29 and that was stronger than yesterday and want to 3-degree course on the lows. fifty survival liminal -- 55 limit not -- livermore. temperatures 52 and above calistoga nevada napa 50 temperatures again on the cool side here for the lows . some summers you wake up and you say it's warm but it's been cool here so far generally from 23 and 29 south a 15 west of ten west of five up to napa airport in the breeze as well will make it a little bit of the sacrament of our. 59 there is not too bad. stop 52 in you, i. eightys 90s 91 palm springs. the monsoon pocket stays in arizona. >> sixtys 70s 80s. not enough cooling to get some locations at the 90s. after today we start to warm up and then by the weekend inland will be warmed up. >> pretty hot it sounds like. >

at the beginning of the paragraph there was a parenthesis, a capital c and then a parenthesis and that is a portion marking to indicate that paragraph is classified at the confidential level which is the lowest level of classification. >> so out of the 30,000 documents, you found these three markings, is that what you're saying. >> three e-mails bore c markings in the body. none of the e-mails had headers at the top. three had within the body a marking for c. >> thank you. >> now recognize the gentleman from tennessee for five minutes. >> thank you. he mentioned one instance in which secretary clinton said that she had -- that she did not mail any classified material to anyone. actually she said that several other times but it is accurate that you found at least 110 instances of when she had mailed, e-mailed classified material. and also they claimed their devices in such a way in order to procollude complete forensic recovery and when secretary clinton said that nothing she sent was marked classified and you said in your press conference but even if information is not marked classifie

instead, these e-mails included only a single, quote, "c," parenthesis, end parenthesis, then end of quotation mark, for confidential, in one paragraph lower down in the text, is that right? >> correct. >> third, you testified that based on these facts, it would have been a, quote, reasonable inference for secretary clinton to, quote, immediately, end of quote, conclude that these e-mails were not in fact classified. so that was also critical new information. but there is one more critical fa fact, and that is this, director. and to the press. these e-mails were not in fact classified. the state department explained to us yesterday they reported that these e-mails are not classified, including the little "c" on these e-mails was a result of a human error. the bottom line is that those little "c"'s should not have been on those documents because they were not in fact classified. when representative watson coleman asked you a few minutes ago about this, you testified that you had not been informed. and i understand that. i'm not beating up on you, i promise you. but can you tell us why

instead, these e-mails included only a single, quote, c parenthesis end parenthesis, and then end of quotation mark for confidential on one paragraph lower down in the text. is that right? >> correct. third. you testified that based on these facts, it would have been a quote, reasonable inference, for secretary clinton to, quote, immediately, end of quote, conclude that these e-mails were not, in fact, classified. so that was also critical new information. but there is one more criminal fact that these e-mails were not, in fact, and to the press, these e-mails were not, in fact classified. the state department explained to us yesterday, they reported that these e-mails are not classified and that -- including this, that the little "c" witon these e-mails was the result of a human error. the bottom line is that those little cs should not have been on those documents, because they were not, in fact, classified. when representative watsman coleman asked you a few minutes ago about this, you testified that you had not been informed. i understand that. i'm not beating up on you, i promise

and in the parenthesis at the end. hemmer and me at 7:00 p.m. she says let me replace fwret at th that. everyone knows greta -- >> maybe she's just trying to save her job, lisa. >> the majority of working women are sexually harassed. so i guess the rest of the women at fox news who say nothing bad's ever happened to them, they're in the minority. i've represented sexually harassed women for 30 years and i still do. we go to work with a smile on our face. we send the boss a nice note. >> with smiley faces. we don't say we love to work there. >> mercedes -- >> apparently not. and i want to say something about the paul weiss law firm. i disagree with your last guest. the paul weiss law firm that's doing the investigation, this is a law firm that represents giant corporate entities like fox news and its parent news corp. it does not represent the gretchen carlsons of the world. it's a very poor choice to do the investigation, and it's going to be skewed in favor of fox news. >> this is a legitimate, this investigation is required by law. it's exactl

, a capital "c" and then a parenthesis. that's a portion marking to indicate that paragraph is classified at the confidential level, which is the lowest level of classification. >> so out of 30,000 documents, this is -- you found these three markings. is that what you're saying? >> three e-mails bore "c" markings down in the body. none had headers, which is at the top of a document that says classified. three had within the body the portion marking for "c." >> thank you. >> i thank the gentleman. i now recognize the gentleman from tennessee, mr. duncan, for five minutes. >> mr. meadows mentioned one instance in which secretary clinton said that she had -- that she did not mail any classified material to anyone. actually, she said that several other times, but it is accurate, director comey, that you found at least 110 instances of which she had mailed, e-mails classified material. >> 110 that she either received or sent. >> right. and it also is accurate that, quote, clinton's lawyers cleaned their devices in such a way as

whatever was marked on those two call lists are a tiny parenthesis which is a "c" which is not the traditional way of doing an entire document. i'm not sure if it was noticed but it shows you the fault in all of this which is that we have call lists the state department now says shouldn't have been classified to begin with. how do you bring a case against somebody when it's clear that the material shouldn't have been classified to begin with? >> has this set a precedent? if you are a defender of now somebody in a classified material, has he -- has director comey said a new bar? >> i think not only has he not set a new bar. his decision is consistent with all the bars presently set. i am, by the way, chagrin to say because i represent people charged in this area. i see the difference clearly. and i've already identified one difference. and there's another difference. and that difference is, besides to whom the material is disclosed and how it was marked, the issue of whether or not there is, i don't know, i heard chairman chaffetz say that it was -- what's the difference between -- >> gross neg

, a capital "c" and then a parenthesis. that's a portion marking to indicate that paragraph is classified at the confidential level, which is the lowest level of classification. >> so out of 30,000 documents, this is -- you found these three markings. is that what you're say sng. >> three e-mails bore "q" markings down in the body. none had headers, which is at the top of a document that says classified. three had within the body the portion marking for "c." >> thank you. >> i thank the gentleman. i now recognize the gentleman from tennessee, mr. duncan, for five minutes. >> mr. meadows mentioned one instance in which secretary clinton said that she had -- that she did not mail any classified material to anyone. actually, she said that several other times, but it is accurate, director comey, that you found at least 110 instances of which she had mailed, e-mails classified material. >> 110 that she either received or sent. >> right. and it also is accurate that, quote, clinton's lawyers cleaned their devices in such a way as

, a capital "c" and then a parenthesis. that's a portion marking to indicate that paragraph is classified at the confidential level, which is the lowest level of classification. >> so out of 30,000 documents, this is -- you found these three markings. is that what you're say sng. >> three e-mails bore "q" markings down in the body. none had headers, which is at the top of a document that says classified. three had within the body the portion marking for "c." >> thank you. >> i thank the gentleman. i now recognize the gentleman from tennessee, mr. duncan, for five minutes. >> mr. meadows mentioned one instance in which secretary clinton said that she had -- that she did not mail any classified material to anyone. actually, she said that several other times, but it is accurate, director comey, that you found at least 110 instances of which she had mailed, e-mails classified material. >> 110 that she either received or sent. >> right. and it also is accurate that, quote, clinton's lawyers cleaned their devices in such a way as

instead, these e-mails included only a single "c" parenthesis -- in parenthesis -- then end of quotation mark for confidential on one paragraph lower down in the text. is that right? >> correct. >> third, you testified that based on these facts, it would have been a "reasonable inference" for secretary clinton to "immediately" conclude that these e-mails were not in fact classified. so that was also critical new information. but there's one more critical fact that these e-mails were not in fact -- and that exists, director. and to the press. these e-mails were not in fact classified. the state department explained to us yesterday they reported that these e-mails are not classified and that -- including the little "c" on these e-mails was a result of a human error. the bottom line is that those little "cs" should not have been on those documents because they were not in fact classified. when representative watson coleman asked you a few minutes about this, you testified that you had not been informed. i understand this. i'm not beating up on you, i promise you. can you tell us -- because

the body of the e-mail there were paragraphs at the beginning of the paragraph had a parenthes parenthesis, a capital "c," then a par renn sis. that is a portion mark -- >> that paragraph. >> that paragraph is classified at the con fidential level. >> out of the 30,000 documents, you found these three markings, is that what you're saying? >> three e-mails bore "c" markings down in the body. none of the e-mails had headers, which is at the top of the document that says it's classified. three had within the body the portion marking for "c." >> thank you. >> i thank the gentleman. now recognize the gentleman from tennessee mr. duncan for five minutes. >> mr. meadows had one instance in which secretary clinton said she did not mail any classified material to anyone. actually she said that several other times. but it is accurate, director comey, that you found at least 110 incidents of when she had e-mailed classified material. >> 110 that she either received or sent. >> right. it also is accurate that, quote, clinton's lawyers claim their devices in such a way as to proclude complete forensic

three different emails, there were paragraphs and at the beginning of the paragraph) , c and that a parenthesis and that is a portion marking to indicate that paragraph is classified as a confidential level which is the lowest level of classification . >> so out of the 30,000 documents, you found these three markings? >> three emails for these markings in the body, none of the emails had headers which is at the top of the document that says it's classified. rehab within the body the portion marking 4c. >> thank you. i think this gentleman and recognize the gentleman from tennessee mister douglas for five minutes. >> thank you mister chairman. mister meadows made some instances where secretary clinton said that she had, that she did not mail any classified material to anyone, actually she said that several other times but it is accurate director comey that you found release 110 instances of when she had mailed you or email classified material. >> 110 that she either received or sent. >> and it also is accurate that quote, clinton's lawyers claimed their devices in such a way as to preclude compl

but also i could -- >> accidentally open parenthesis, c, close parenthesis and intent the paragraph. >> you wouldn't accidentally type that. someone down the chain -- >> so my question is, someone down the chain being investigated? because they had the intent, clearly, if they had the sophistication, which hillary clinton, you insinuate, may have lacked, if they had the sophistication to know what this boor marking was, they had to have the intent to re-create it or the intent to cut, copy, paste, from a secure system to an unsecure system. wouldn't that be cret? >> potentially, but there's not an open criminal investigation of that person way down the chain. >> shouldn't there be? >> a criminal investigation? >> an investigation if there's intent, which is what you -- i mean, and i think you may be reasonable in requiring that threshold. don't we treat everybody the same, whether it's the top of the chain or the bottom of the chain. >> sure. you wants to, if the conduct is the same. but we did not criminally investigate whoever started that chain and put the "c" in those paragraphs.

. >> is there a parenthesis in the first line? [inaudible] [inaudie mi speaking off the mic) . >> we can note that the parenthesis can be taken out and there in error on page 19. for some folks it's page 17 moving vehicle. we have talked about this [reading] an officer will not fire a discharge unless the occupier is an immediate threat officers will not move from his or her moving vehicle period. it is from my understanding and washington d.c. this has been the policy gave a lot of exceptions this was i will say a big commitment of chief sir there shall be a strict prohibition here i feel strongly we keep that language and there's a strict prohibition on shooting at cars and we borrow language from a department that has done this for 30 yearses . >> chief sir put it in the original 1. [inaudible] principle 8 and he believed in that. and departments not only since new york has included it since 72 but chicago denver and washington d.c. all have the same policy. and deputy chief sinus and think chief agreed with that. >> i would le

the ht say in parenthesis, u.n. security council you can see in syria how deadlocked it's been. i don't notice president putin seeking u.n. security council authority for things he has done. but when it's ded locked like that, -- deadlocked like that you can't say you're undermining its authority when we have gone back to the u.n. specifically to get a resolution to have one last chance to comply. the u.s. wanted to do this much earlier. the reason it was delayed is because we went through this u.n. process. so i understand -- i understand of course it would have been better politically to have done it with the u.n. resolution. but by then you had a blockage. you had a stalemate. >> mr. blare you talked entirely so far about decisions before the war, almost nothing about decisions in the aftermath and during the occupation period. commanders on the ground urged you to reconsider the strategy. you yourself told george bush in the letter in june 2003 that we are not geared up for this. it was quite clear things were going badly on the ground. why did you not change that strategy,

and i might say in parenthesis, you know, the u.n. security council, you can see in syria how deadlocked it's been and i don't notice president putin going and seeking u.n. security council authority for the things he has done. but, when it is deadlocked like that, you can't say you're undermining its authority when we had gone back to the u.n. specifically to get a resolution. gave them one last chance to comply. the americans wanted to do the military action by the way much earlier. the reason it was delayed because we went through this u.n. process. so, i understand of course it would have been better politically to have done it with the u.n. resolution. but by then you had a blockage, you had stalemate. literally right, go around -- >> tom -- from the sun. you talk entirely so far about the decisions before the war, almost nothing about the decisions in the aftermath and during the occupation period. commanders on the ground, chilcot said, urged you to reconsider the strategy. you yourself told george bush in the letter in june 20

i might say in parenthesis, the u.n. security council you can see in syria how dead locked it has been. i don't notice president putin seeking u.n. security council authority for things he has done. when it is dead locked you can't say you are undermining its authority when we have gone back to the u.n. to get a resolution that gave one last chance to comply. the americans wanted to do this military action much earlier. the reason it was delayed was because we went through this u.n. process. so i understand of course we would be better politically to have done it with the u.n. resolution. by then you had a blockage. you had stalemate. >>> you talked entirely so far about the decisions before the war, almost nothing about decisions in the aftermath and during occupation period. commanders on the ground urged you to reconsider strategy. you told george bush that we are not geared up for this. it was quite clear something was going badly wrong on the ground. why did you not change that strategy? pull the troops out or surge

she had eight )-close-parenthesis marking confidential.ly we don't know because we don't know what she told the fbi whether she lied under road. dagen: on top of hillary clinton if she was selected president of the united states. you've got bill clinton. former president running around the white house with a lot of time on his hands. what does that look like? i'm not joking in terms of his potential influence and power in the white house or he doesn't have a designated job. but if that look like? again, causing problems. >> i think people have to ask themselves the basic question about whether or not the country wants to return to this and go through all of this again. if you want a situation in which you are looking toward a new administration with endless investigations and the and lawyers and issues about coverups and skirting the edge of legal propriety, that is essentially what you're voting for. there's no reason based on the most recent experience this is going to continue because it's continued for 20 years. maria: he said the amer