With Loretta Lynch set to testify before a congressional committee today about her tarmac powwow with Bill Clinton, you may recall last week’s hearing: representatives questioned FBI Director James Comey’s reasoning behind his decision allowing Clinton to skate on that server thing, even after laying out a case supporting prosecution. Several oddities arose during the hearing, including the revelation that Clinton wasn’t questioned under oath, nor were her answers recorded. But as Comey reminded us, lying to the FBI is still illegal, leaving many of us scratching our heads wondering why the agency didn’t require the oath, given he laid bare her penchant for lying, proving her word is worth about as much as today’s British pound. But there was another curiosity during the hearing: the fact that during its investigation the FBI didn’t review Hillary’s under-oath congressional Benghazi testimony to determine whether it matched-up with her answers to their inquiries. Here’s the pertinent exchange:

.@jasoninthehouse: Did FBI review statements @HillaryClinton made about emails under oath? https://t.co/YkPMdsoEmE pic.twitter.com/pyQid15rR0

— CBS News (@CBSNews) July 7, 2016

Now, Director Comey has assured us that Queen Hills did not lie to the FBI. It’s unclear how he knows this, but given he admitted he’s fully aware of her congressional testimony last fall, we can infer she told his agents something else. Something that jived with information she likely knows they have in their possession? Even something, perhaps, that she tried to scrub from her server via the help of a Fifth-Amendment invoking IT staffer? Here’s Rep. Jim Jordan questioning Hillary. Note that Comey dismantled her prior testimony during his presser last week: