Via Fox News‘ Catherine Herridge and Pamela K Browne comes this statement from the FBI.  The statement concerns a subject exposed in the FBI’s release to Congress of several more 302s IFBI interview summaries) last Friday:

allegations of a “quid pro quo” between a senior State Department executive and FBI agents during the Hillary Clinton email investigation, two congressional sources told Fox News.

The FBI statement follows:

Prior to the initiation of the FBI’s investigation of former Secretary Clinton’s personal email server, the FBI was asked to review and make classification determinations on FBI emails and information which were being produced by the State Department pursuant to FOIA. The FBI determined that one such email was classified at the Secret level. A senior State Department official requested the FBI re-review that email to determine whether it was in fact classified or whether it might be protected from release under a different FOIA exemption. A now-retired FBI official, who was not part of the subsequent Clinton investigation, told the State Department official that they would look into the matter. Having been previously unsuccessful in attempts to speak with the senior State official, during the same conversation, the FBI official asked the State Department official if they would address a pending, unaddressed FBI request for space for additional FBI employees assigned abroad. Following the call, the FBI official consulted with a senior FBI executive responsible for determining the classification of the material and determined the email was in fact appropriately classified at the Secret level. The FBI official subsequently told the senior State official that the email was appropriately classified at the Secret level and that the FBI would not change the classification of the email. The classification of the email was not changed, and it remains classified today. Although there was never a quid pro quo, these allegations were nonetheless referred to the appropriate officials for review.

This sure sounds like the State official (separately identified as Democratic Party Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s Undersecretary for Management Patrick Kennedy) and the FBI discussed a quid pro quo—those extra overseas slots.  That the FBI seems in the end to have rejected the quid is irrelevant to the apparent existence of the discussion.

Here’s one, from the files of Democrats.

John Podesta, one of Democratic Party Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s most senior advisors, says WikiLeaks and Republican Party Presidential candidate Donald Trump are in cahoots over the former’s leaks concerning Podesta’s, Clinton’s, and the Clinton campaign’s emails.

Clinton adviser John Podesta pointed the finger at Trump adviser Roger Stone, who he said has been in touch with WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange. Podesta also raised as evidence an August tweet in which Stone said Podesta’s “time in the barrel” was coming. The tweet was sent shortly after WikiLeaks published scores of hacked emails from other Democratic officials.

Because a simple prediction that comes home must be proof of collusion.  Sure.

He also worked in the Democrats’ fantasy of a Russian Connection:

[H]e also suggested the driving force could be “Mr Trump’s deep engagement and ties with Russian interests in his business affairs.”

As usual when the Left can’t form a coherent argument on a subject, they try to distract with accusations and character assassination.

Is this what we want in the White House?