Emails

The private email server

Why she used it, what was classified, what was deleted, and why there were no charges

James Comey, FBI director from 2013 to 2017, official portrait.
Federal Bureau of Investigation · Source & image context ↗

RECORD / AT A GLANCE

Rule-breaking documented / no criminal charges

The server broke State Department rules and put classified material at risk; that is established by the department’s own watchdog and the FBI. Whether it should have been prosecuted is a judgment call people still argue. The claims about bleach, hammers and the subpoena mostly have a factual core that gets exaggerated.

THE EVENTS / THE INVESTIGATION / THE STORY

The chronology.

READ THE FILE

Evidence & assessment.

Open an article for its evidence, labeled AI assessment and numbered sources. Read the complete static edition ↗

OPEN THE RECORD

Sources & limits.

Numbered citations in each article identify the relevant sources. These records have different purposes and evidentiary weight.

  1. State Inspector General: email records and cybersecurity, May 2016 ↗

    Inspector-general administrative evaluation covering several secretaries. See especially printed pages 23–24 and 36–42. It is not a criminal verdict.

  2. FBI Director Comey: July 5, 2016 investigative findings ↗

    Contemporaneous statement announcing an FBI recommendation; DOJ held charging authority. Classification-at-the-time and later classification are distinguished.

  3. FactCheck.org: what the FBI files said about deletion ↗

    Contemporaneous close reading of the original FBI record. It identifies the distinction between a December 2014 retention instruction and its March 2015 execution.

  4. 18 U.S.C. § 793: gathering, transmitting or losing defense information ↗

    Statutory text. Subsection (f) includes gross negligence; absence of intent is not a universal answer to every possible charge. Liability still requires the actual elements and admissible evidence.

  5. DOJ Inspector General: FBI and DOJ actions before the 2016 election ↗

    Official June 2018 review. Its charging analysis, tarmac findings, October disclosure criticism and political-bias findings have different scopes.

  6. PolitiFact: Making sense of the bleach and hammer claims, 16 Jun 2023 ↗

    Explains what BleachBit is, who ran it and what the hammer was used on, from the FBI file.

  7. Grassley and Crawford request review of previously unevaluated email-investigation material, July 29, 2025 ↗

    Oversight request and the chairmen’s interpretation of declassified material. Claims about contents or FBI omissions are attributed to them; publication does not authenticate every underlying Russian-language report.

Discussion

Comment, dispute or support a claim, submit a source or rate this page through a short Google Form. It asks you to sign in with Google so we know you are a real person; your email is never shown. Nothing appears here until it has been reviewed. Conversation on X tagged #AIFiles #AIFilesClintons shows up below after the daily refresh.

CommentSubmit a sourceRate this pageStart a discussion on XFull forum topicSee all disputesFollow updates (Google Group)

Reader comments

Approved reader comments and ratings appear here when JavaScript is on.

On X

Posts from the daily snapshot appear here when JavaScript is on. You can read this subject’s threads on the forum: Forum: #AIFilesClintons.

Reader comments are shown only after review, and rows removed from the form’s sheet disappear at the next refresh. X posts are a read-only daily snapshot; posts deleted or made private there are removed at the next refresh. Inclusion is not endorsement. A submitted source stays pending review until a page update says otherwise.