Appearing on Thursday's New Day, CNN political analyst and former NBC Meet the Press anchor David Gregory repeatedly insisted that Hillary Clinton's handling of her email with a private server was "not illegal," and that this assertion is "not in dispute." He ended up claiming that the proof of this claim was that FBI director James Comey chose not to prosecute, even though it is entirely possible to break the law and avoid being prosecuted. After suggesting that Comey was perhaps acting inappropriately by speaking out negatively against Clinton even while announcing that he would not seek prosecution, Gregory ended up fretting over the possibility that Republicans would try to "re-litigate" the matter.
At 6:41 a.m. ET, after divulging that his wife represents Clinton's aides -- but not Clinton herself -- in the email matter, Gregory reacted to the email correspondence recently released between former Secretary of State Colin Powell and Clinton from when she was Secretary of State. Gregory claimed: "What's not in dispute is this was a serious lapse in judgment on her part. She has admitted that. What is also not in dispute is that this was not illegal based on what the FBI and the Justice Department-"
Co-host Chris Cuomo, who was once admonished by liberal CNN political commentator Carl Bernstein for making a similar claim that Clinton did not break the law, did not question Gregory's story as he jumped in to respond:
And that Colin Powell, a man of very high integrity, told her, "I'm using a personal computer because these rules are cumbersome, because I'm concerned about the transparency aspects of it. This is what I do."
Shortly past 7:30 a.m. ET, Gregory returned to further discuss Powell's email correspondence with Clinton.and, fr the second of three times, claimed that it was "not in dispute" that Clinton's handling of her email was "not illegal." Gregory:
Look, what's not in dispute is that this was not illegal, right? Because the FBI has said there was nothing illegal that she did here, and didn't recommend any charges. What's also not in dispute is this was really bad judgment on the part of Hillary Clinton regardless of what advice she was getting from former Secretary Powell, and she has admitted that as well.
Moments later, after he made the claim a third time, co-host Alisyn Camerota finally questioned him on his accuracy on the matter.
DAVID GREGORY: Again, what's important is that there was nothing illegal about this, and-
ALISYN CAMEROTA: I mean, is that right? Because is "nothing prosecutable" the same as "nothing illegal"? I mean, the fact that the FBI said, "You'll never win this case, and we can't prosecute that," that was their recommendation, doesn't that still mean that something improper and possibly legally suspect happened?
Gregory insisted that his account was accurate, and suggested that it is against the system for Republicans to want to "re-litigate" the matter:
No. In our system of justice, the FBI investigates, and if you don't recommend charges, then you don't charge because there's no case there. That is our system of justice. It is striking to me that the FBI director does something that he would normally never do, which is talk publicly about why he didn't decide to recommend charges, and why the Attorney General, Loretta Lynch, is not standing up for judicial independence.
He added:
Whatever your politics, our justice system is such that, if you don't decide to charge somebody, you don't talk about it. In this case, this is completely in the political environment. You have members of Congress who apparently believe in judicial independence who are calling for this to be re-litigated and re-investigated, which again is not our system.
Below is a transcript of the relevant portion of the Thursday, September 9, New Day on CNN:
6:41 a.m. ET
CHRIS CUOMO: How big a deal is this in the context of Clinton has been saying all along that she went to Secretary Powell for guidance, he said that he had used his own computer, that he had set up his own personal space, and that was guidance for her? The Trump campaign, the Republicans who have held a gazillion hearings on this, have said that she was lying about that essentially all along. What now?DAVID GREGORY, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, a couple of things, I always have to point out my wife, Beth Wilkinson, represents Hillary Clinton's aides in this investigation -- not the former Secretary herself.
CUOMO: So you knew this and said nothing to us.
GREGORY (laughing): No, I did not know this. But I think there is still a dispute between them because Powell made it clear that she was using the private server, and he never did that, but he's clearly expressing to her the difficulties about when personal email could be subject to the law, could become public record, and that she would have to be careful. What's not in dispute is this was a serious lapse in judgment on her part. She has admitted that. What is also not in dispute is that this was not illegal based on what the FBI and the Justice Department-
CUOMO: And that Colin Powell, a man of very high integrity, told her, "I'm using a personal computer because these rules are cumbersome, because I'm concerned about the transparency aspects of it. This is what I do."
GREGORY: Right. But that's different than having an outside server, and that's certainly different than deleting thousands of emails. So the politics of this is never going to go away, right? But we know some things that are not in dispute, and I think this gets into other areas about what's classified, what's not, the difficulties of personal communications that a lot of government officials go through, especially at the highest levels. and so I want to at least be careful at this point about overreading this.
(...)
7:36 a.m. ET
ALISYN CAMEROTA: I mean, he's warning her that this will be a problem, and she -- it sounds like -- interpreted this to mean, "Okay, I'll set up my own system."GREGORY: Yeah. Look, what's not in dispute is that this was not illegal, right? Because the FBI has said there was nothing illegal that she did here, and didn't recommend any charges. What's also not in dispute is this was really bad judgment on the part of Hillary Clinton regardless of what advice she was getting from former Secretary Powell, and she has admitted that as well.
What's also clear is that, you know, anybody who is a high government official is looking for some way to have some private communication, and that became more complicated, even since 2008 in terms of how we treat email and the vulnerability of email. Of course, President Obama went through this as well where initially he wanted to have his own BlackBerry as well.
CAMEROTA: But what does this change? Now that we know that Colin Powell did try to say, "Hey, this is very dicey, and by the way, the State Department is all up in your business, and you should try to do something so that they are not," what does it change in terms of our perspective in how she handled this?
GREGORY: You know, I don't think it changes a lot. The political war over this -- why she made a decision to delete thousands of emails which was a mistake, why she handled this, the explanation of this accountability for this in such a poor manner, that's still going to be political grist for the mill. Again, what's important is that there was nothing illegal about this, and-
CAMEROTA: I mean, is that right? Because is "nothing prosecutable" the same as "nothing illegal"? I mean, the fact that the FBI said, "You'll never win this case, and we can't prosecute that," that was their recommendation, doesn't that still mean that something improper and possibly legally suspect happened?
GREGORY: No. In our system of justice, the FBI investigates, and if you don't recommend charges, then you don't charge because there's no case there. That is our system of justice. It is striking to me that the FBI director does something that he would normally never do, which is talk publicly about why he didn't decide to recommend charges, and why the Attorney General, Loretta Lynch, is not standing up for judicial independence.
Whatever your politics, our justice system is such that, if you don't decide to charge somebody, you don't talk about it. In this case, this is completely in the political environment. You have members of Congress who apparently believe in judicial independence who are calling for this to be re-litigated and re-investigated, which again is not our system.
