James Comey angrily defended decision for five hours before committee, saying Clinton was not ‘sophisticated’ enough to know she sent classified information

FBI director James Comey angrily defended his impartiality before lawmakers on Thursday after explaining why he chose not to prosecute an “unsophisticated” Hillary Clinton.

During nearly five hours of nonstop grilling by the oversight committee of the House of Representatives, Comey insisted that recommending charges in the case would have been “celebrity hunting” because normally prosecutors require evidence of intent in such cases, despite what was possibly unlawful handling of classified emails.

Under the 1917 Espionage Act there is a provision for bringing charges for gross negligence without evidence of an intentional breach of the law, he said, but only one much more serious case has ever been brought using it.

“You know what would be a double standard? If she were prosecuted for gross negligence,” said Comey. “No reasonable prosecutor would bring the second case in 100 years based on gross negligence.”

“That’s just not fair,” he added. “It would be fair to have a robust disciplinary proceeding. It’s not fair to prosecute someone on these facts.”

The FBI director also dealt with the question of whether Clinton had knowingly exposed classified information while secretary of state, something he said would have been extremely hard to prove beyond a reasonable doubt.

Despite Clinton’s claims to the contrary during earlier testimony to Congress, three of the emails found by the FBI had contained classification markings – signified by a [C] symbol – but Comey said it could not be assumed that she should have recognised this.

“One of the things I have learned in this case is that the secretary may not have been as sophisticated as people would assume,” said Comey. “She did not even have a computer in her office, for example.

“I see evidence of great carelessness, but I do not see evidence that secretary Clinton … knew she was doing something against the law,” he added.

The sometimes breathtakingly candid testimony shed new light on the reasons behind the FBI’s decision not to recommend charges to the Department of Justice, a choice that led to the case being formally dropped by attorney general Loretta Lynch on Wednesday night.

But Republican lawmakers were scathing about what they argued was an overly charitable interpretation of the law.

“What does it take for someone to misuse classified information and get in trouble for it?” asked Representative William Hurd of Texas.

“What are we going to have to enact to get you guys to prosecute somebody for gross negligence?” added his Texan colleague Blake Farenthold.

Comey, a former registered Republican with a reputation for political impartiality, largely kept his calm during the exchanges but appeared to lose his temper when pressed on whether the announcement of his decision had been coordinated with the Obama administration.

“Look me in eye and listen to what I am about to say,” he said, after accusing Florida Republican John Mica of insinuating political orchestration. “I did not coordinate that with anyone: the White House, the Department of Justice – nobody outside the FBI family had any idea what I was about to say. I say that under oath ... I don’t want to get strong, but I want to be definitive about that.”

“The recommendation was made by people who didn’t give a hoot about politics,” added Comey.

Hillary for America national press secretary Brian Fallon said Thursday that Comey’s testimony further vindicated Clinton. “Director Comey’s testimony clearly knocked down a number of false Republican talking points and reconciled apparent contradictions between his previous remarks and Hillary Clinton’s public statements,” Fallon said in a statement. “While Republicans may try to keep this issue alive, this hearing proved those efforts will only backfire.”

Nonetheless, the hearing raised further uncomfortable political questions for Clinton, who has previously denied sending or receiving classified information on her private server or deleting any work-related emails.

Trey Gowdy, whose Benghazi committee had uncovered the existence of the private server, forced Comey to acknowledge that these and other claims had proved to be false.

“We have no basis to conclude she lied to the FBI,” said Comey when pushed on the mounting inconsistencies.

House oversight committee chairman Jason Chaffetz suggested that Congress could call on the FBI to investigate possible perjury. “Do you need a referral?” he asked. “Sure do,” replied Comey. “You’ll have one in the next few hours,” said Chaffetz.

suggested that Congress could call on the FBI to investigate possibly perjury. “Do you need a referral?” he asked. “Sure do,” replied Comey. “You’ll have one in the next few hours,” said Jordan.

Comey also said the server, which was kept in the family basement and set up by former president Bill Clinton, was less secure than commercially available services such as Gmail, and should probably have led to disciplinary proceedings if discovered while the secretary was still in office.

“An average employee still in government service would be subject to a disciplinary sanction,” said the FBI director when asked about double standards. “If they left they would still be in the same boat [as Clinton].”

But the explanations made little headway with Republicans on the committee, who seem determined to keep the issue alive despite the DoJ and FBI decision.

“If the average American had done what you had laid out, they would be in handcuffs on their way to jail and they probably should,” said Chaffetz. “It seems like there is a double standard: if your name is not Clinton and you’re not part of the elite, Lady Justice will act differently.”