Sean Hannity lies about Trump campaign and associates destroying evidence
Despite Hannity's claim, Mueller report clearly and unequivocally states that Trump campaign and associates destroyed evidence
Blog ››› ››› MEDIA MATTERS STAFF
Sean Hannity lied to his audience when he said the Trump campaign and Trump associates did not destroy evidence that would be relevant to the special counsel’s investigation.
SEAN HANNITY (HOST): That’s right, no bleach bit, unlike Hillary Clinton. The president didn't destroy subpoenaed emails or any other evidence in this case. He did not invoke executive privilege. Instead, according to former independent counsel Ken Starr, the president’s cooperation in this case was unprecedented. And that’s because President Trump had nothing to hide.
According to a report from NPR, the special counsel found that “some” people “associated with the Trump Campaign” and others interviewed in the investigation “deleted relevant communications or communicated during the relevant period using applications that feature encryption.” This prevented Mueller’s office from ruling out the possibility “that the unavailable information would shed additional light on (or cast in a new light) the events described in the report.” From Page 18 of the special counsel’s report:
Further, the Office learned that some of the individuals we interviewed or whose conduct we investigated—including some associated with the Trump Campaign—deleted relevant communications or communicated during the relevant period using applications that feature encryption or that do not provide for long-term retention of data or communications records. In such cases, the Office was not able to corroborate witness statements through comparison to contemporaneous communications or fully question witnesses about statements that appeared inconsistent with other known facts.
Accordingly, while this report embodies factual and legal determinations that the Office believes to be accurate and complete to the greatest extent possible, given these identified gaps, the Office cannot rule out the possibility that the unavailable information would shed additional light on (or cast in a new light) the events described in the report.