{"database": "press", "table": "releases", "rows": [["http://goodlatte.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=691", "Goodlatte Presses Justice Department on Secret Agreements with Top Clinton Advisors", "2016-10-03", "2016", "2016-10", "Republican", "House", "VA", "Robert Goodlatte", "G000289", "goodlatte.house.gov", null, null, "legacy", "Congressman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.), Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, today pressed Attorney General Loretta Lynch about a secret agreement to destroy the laptops of top advisors to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. As part of the House Judiciary Committee\u2019s ongoing oversight of Secretary Clinton\u2019s unauthorized use of a private email server during her tenure as Secretary of State, the Justice Department provided a private review of certain immunity agreements entered into during the investigation. The immunity agreements mentioned secret side agreements between the Justice Department, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and Beth Wilkinson, the lawyer representing Cheryl Mills, chief of staff and counselor to Secretary Clinton, and Heather Samuelson, senior advisor to Secretary Clinton. After reviewing the side agreements, the Committee has learned that the FBI agreed to destroy Mills and Samuelson\u2019s laptops after inspecting them.In his letter to Attorney General Lynch, Chairman Goodlatte calls on the Justice Department to provide information about the side agreements and answer the many questions they raise about the FBI\u2019s investigation. Below is the text of the letter. The signed copy can be found here. October 3, 2016Dear Attorney General Lynch:As part of the Judiciary Committee\u2019s ongoing oversight of Secretary Clinton\u2019s unauthorized use of a private email server during her tenure as Secretary of State, the Justice Department (DOJ) provided in camera review of certain immunity agreements.  After a specific request from the Committee, based on references made in the immunity agreements to certain \u201cside agreements,\u201d DOJ subsequently provided in camera review of those \u201cside agreements\u201d between DOJ, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and Beth Wilkinson, the lawyer representing both Cheryl Mills and Heather Samuelson.  Like many things about this case, these new materials raise more questions than answers. Please provide a written response to the below questions and make DOJ staff available for a briefing on this matter no later than October 10, 2016.1.\tWhy did the FBI agree to destroy both Cheryl Mills\u2019 and Heather Samuelson\u2019s laptops after concluding its search?2.\tDoesn\u2019t the willingness of Ms. Mills and Ms. Samuelson to have their laptops destroyed by the FBI contradict their claim that the laptops could have been withheld because they contained non-relevant, privileged information?  If so, doesn\u2019t that undermine the claim that the side agreements were necessary?3.\tHave these laptops, or the contents of the laptops, in fact been destroyed, thereby making follow up investigations by the FBI, or Congressional oversight, impossible? 4.\tFor both the Mills and Samuelson laptops please provide individual numbers on the following:  \r\na.\tHow many total documents were reviewed by the FBI filter review team from the Mills and Samuelson laptops?   \r\nb.\tHow many documents did the FBI filter review team deem to be privileged and withhold from the FBI investigative team?   \r\nc.\tHow many documents were ultimately turned over from the Mills and Samuelson laptops to the FBI investigative team?   \r\nd.\tHow many documents were withheld from the FBI investigative team from each laptop for lack of relevancy?  \r\ne.\tHow many documents were withheld from the FBI investigative team because they fell outside the date range agreed to between DOJ and Ms. Wilkinson in the side letters dated June 10, 2016?  \r\nf.\tPlease indicate how many documents were withheld from the FBI investigative team because they were both not relevant AND outside the agreed upon date range.   \r\ng.\tHow many classified documents, broken down by national security classification level, were on each of the Mills and Samuelson laptops?5.\tPlease provide the privilege log for all documents withheld by the filter review team from the FBI investigative team for both the Mills and Samuelson laptops. If no such log was created, please create one in the same manner the Department requires private parties to satisfy their obligations under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26.6.\tPlease provide any opinion, memo, or other materials, whether formally endorsed or not, from the DOJ Office of Legal Counsel, or the FBI Office of the General Counsel related to the following:  \r\na.\tDOJ and FBI procedures on privilege review.   \r\nb.\tThe validity of Cheryl Mills and Heather Samuelson\u2019s claim of attorney client privilege with respect to Secretary Clinton.  \r\nc.\tThe ability of Cheryl Mills and Heather Samuelson to sit in on the investigative interview of Secretary Clinton. 7.\tPlease explain why DOJ agreed to limit their search of the Mills and Samuelson laptops to a date no later than January 31, 2015 and therefore give up any opportunity to find evidence related to the destruction of evidence or obstruction of justice related to Secretary Clinton\u2019s unauthorized use of a private email server during her tenure as Secretary of State.8.\tWhy was this time limit necessary when Ms. Mills and Ms. Samuelson were granted immunity for any potential destruction of evidence charges?9.\tPlease confirm whether a grand jury was convened to investigate Secretary Clinton\u2019s unauthorized use of a private email server. Disclosure is authorized under Fed. R. Crim. P. 6(e)(3)(A)(i) and (e)(3)(D).  10.\tPlease confirm whether the immunity agreements listed on n. 2 and the \u201cside agreements\u201d between Beth Wilkinson and DOJ, dated June 10, 2016, are the entirety of the immunity agreements granted as part of the Department\u2019s investigation into Secretary Clinton\u2019s unauthorized use of a private email server during her tenure as Secretary of State. Sincerely, Bob Goodlatte  \r\nChairman  \r\nHouse Judiciary Committee", 1, "2026-03-30T12:14:52Z", "2026-03-30T12:14:52Z"]], "columns": ["url", "title", "date", "year", "month", "party", "chamber", "state", "member_name", "bioguide_id", "domain", "scraper", "source", "date_source", "text", "has_text", "collected_at", "updated_at"], "primary_keys": ["url"], "primary_key_values": ["http://goodlatte.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=691"], "units": {}, "query_ms": 1.4379839412868023, "source": "dwillis/congress-press", "source_url": "https://github.com/dwillis/congress-press", "license": "MIT", "license_url": "https://github.com/dwillis/congress-press/blob/main/LICENSE"}