Another thought on State’s quid pro quo offer to the FBI occurs to me based on an exchange between Fox News‘ Catherine Herridge and State Department spokesman Mark Toner concerning the FBI’s 302 (interview summary form) containing the apparent offer. The relevant part of the exchange began with Herridge calling out Toner on his denial of certain facts.
“[Redacted] indicated he had been contacted by PATRICK KENNEDY, Undersecretary of State, who had asked his assistance in altering the email’s classification in exchange for a ‘quid pro quo.’ “[Redacted] advised that in exchange for marking the email unclassified, STATE would reciprocate by allowing the FBI to place more Agents in countries where they are presently forbidden.”
“I mean, this conflicts directly with what you’re saying today,” Herridge said after reading it aloud.
“I’m sorry,” Toner said, smiling. “I could speak to the fact that 302s are simply interviews conducted by the FBI.”
“So you’re saying the FBI agent either got it wrong or is lying in this 302?” Herridge asked.
“I can’t speak to what his or her intentions were, saying these kinds of things, but clearly expressing a personal opinion about what happened,” Toner said. “Any, really, assertion that this was somehow tit for tat or quid pro quo, exchange in that manner, really, frankly is insulting.”
No, Toner, what’s insulting is your cynical, Alinsky-esque refusal to answer the question and your attempt at deflecting by insulting the questioner.