State Department Staffer Granted Immunity.
BROWN: Immunity, that's the deal offered to a former State Department employee. Bryan Pagliano set up Hillary Clinton's private email server and he's now immune from facing any charges related to what he did. Should Democrats be nervous about Clinton's chances of being charged? Bob Anderson just retired as the executive assistant director of the FBI's criminal and cyber division, and he also used to run the counterintelligence division in the FBI. Bob, thanks for joining us.</s>BOB ANDERSON, FORMER DIRECTOR, FBI CYBER DIVISION: Sure. Good morning, Pam.</s>BROWN: Good morning. Just for context starting off, how unusual or common is it for someone to be granted immunity in a case like this? What does that tell you when he's granted immunity?</s>ANDERSON: Well, it's not really uncommon, Pam, but in this case it's all about information and it really leads the investigators both from the FBI and the Department of Justice to who, what, where, why, and how, and what was really going on with the server.</s>BROWN: So, clearly this was someone the FBI wanted to speak to but what exactly does immunity mean in this case? Does it offer him full protection no matter what?</s>ANDERSON: There's different levels of immunity? I'm not privileged to exactly what was granted but at least in this case, it allows the investigators to talk to him and ask specific questions about what was going on with the server and particularly what type of traffic the server was built to handle -- whether it was classified or unclassified.</s>BROWN: So the FBI is presumably speaking to, or going to speak to more of people who work with Clinton, some of her aides. So, could they be at risk? Because of the server that she wanted to set up so much, focus has been on Clinton herself. But what about her aides?</s>ANDERSON: Yes, I think they're going to be looking at everybody. These types of investigations with mishandling classified information, it really is a complex investigation, not only around the classification of information that potentially could have been sent over the Internet, or to a different server. But all the people that were involved in accidentally or intentionally sending those type of communications.</s>BROWN: So, those that accidentally, you know, sent the classified communication, if that did happen, would they be held liable then in that case?</s>ANDERSON: What we have to do -- and believe it or not, these happen not often but they happen with regularity in the United States intelligence community. So, people look at the investigators look at everybody that's involved in these cases and look at a lot of things, the damage of the potential information that could get out or if people were doing it intentionally or by error. And if by error, there are procedures to clean the information that's been spilt.</s>BROWN: So, let's talk about the security of the server. You have this issue whether information was classified that was sent. And on the other hand, whether there were hackers that could have gotten into the server. We know that security logs have been reviewed and there is no evidence on those security logs that a hacker got into the server. But wouldn't any good hacker, especially from somewhere like, you know, Russia or China be able to erase their track so that there is no evidence on the security log?</s>ANDERSON: Well, there is no doubt that hackers from any nation state, whether Russia or China are very, very sophisticated but I think a very thorough forensic review will be abducted and I think we'll have a pretty idea if anybody could have or did get into that system.</s>BROWN: So, last question for you, because the big question, of course, is timeline. We know this investigation has been going on for several months now. Do you have any sense how much longer this could be?</s>ANDERSON: No, I'll tell you just from being in the FBI for a long time and sitting four doors from Jim Comey, the current director, for the last couple of years, he's a very smart, thorough man and he's going to go by the rule of law. So, the investigation will be concluded when it's done and not before then.</s>BROWN: All right. Anything else you want to add about this, Bob, that I didn't touch on?</s>ANDERSON: No, I think the big thing think here is that it's going to be treated like any other investigation whether the person involved is a member of the government or from one of the intelligence organizations. We look at it the same way. That's fair and an honest way to do it.</s>BROWN: All right. Bob Anderson, thank you for coming on. We appreciate it.</s>ANDERSON: Thanks, Pam.</s>BROWN: And coming up at the top of hour, with all the political attention in Flint, Michigan, we take a look at how the residents affected by lead in their drinking water are viewing this presidential race, and we'll take you live to Louisiana as polls open and the primary. Plus up next, take a look. Could this plane debris be part of missing airliner MH370? Details on what was recently discovered right after this break.