Right, here's the problem.
Clinton's thrive on old school wild accusations campaigning. So that no matter what horrible thing that they have done, it gets turned on its head. It's just too incredible that they did half of the things that they are alleged to have done, yet it may be true that they did do at least half of them.
It won't stick.
Here's another take, and I defer to the technology experts to correctly answer this question. We know that the Chinese were/are data mining. So isn't it possible that this data mining included jobs or executables that would make the system or computer containing the information do the search and then launch the findings to China? If so, this may create an audit trail that would appear to implicate the victim and cover up the aggressor.
grammar police alert
Clinton's = possessive, not plural
should have been "Clintons"
Off to the pokey. :-)