The Inspector General’s report on Hillary Clinton’s email usage at the Sate Department makes it more likely the Department of Justice will pursue and indictment. That’s according to a source who spoke to Fox News‘ Catherine Herridge:

“It is very harmful to her and increases the likelihood and pressure on DOJ to indict,” said the source, who was not authorized to speak on the record. “[The IG report] is not evidence in itself, but it clears up confusion [about] Department of State rules and makes the IG a witness, and the people they interviewed, to her computer antics being done without permission.”

The ongoing FBI criminal probe — investigating Clinton’s emails practices as secretary of state — is focused on whether the more than 2,100 classified emails discovered on her server constitute a violation of federal code, including the Espionage Act’s 18 USC 793, known as the “gross negligence” statute…

“[The] report will be useful as rebuttal, potential evidence in 18 USC 1001 charges and establishing aspects of 18 USC 793,” the source said.

The story says 18 USC 1001 is a statue that covers false statements, though it notes any false statements Clinton has made in public or to the media could not become the basis of charges.

In an appearance on Fox News, Herridge also highlighted the revealing statement made by campaign chairman John Podesta in a memo last weekend. Over a graphic showing a key line from the memo Herridge said, “Another conflict came to light after the Clinton campaign manager sent a memo over the weekend indicating the State Department told Clinton two years ago, in 2014, that she was not doing enough to preserve her government emails.” She continued, “Yet the following year Clinton told reporters at her first news conference on the emails at the United Nations that she was meeting all requirements under the federal records act.”

This is the same point I made Tuesday in this post:

According to Podesta, once the State Department contacted Clinton in July 2014, she realized that her email had not been automatically “captured and preserved.” That makes sense. If it had been captured and preserved, the State Department wouldn’t be contacting her looking for her emails. And yet, nine months later Clinton was telling the media that the “vast majority” of her emails “were captured and preserved immediately” because they went to other government accounts.

It’s not just that Clinton was wrong about her email being captured and preserved. The problem here is that, according to her own campaign chairman, she knew it wasn’t true when she said it months later.

Here is video of Herridge’s appearance: