"As we have seen repeatedly in Clinton’s explanations of the email controversy, she relies on excessively technical and legalistic answers to explain her actions," Glenn Kessler says. "While Comey did say there was no evidence she lied to the FBI, that is not the same as saying she told the truth to the American public — which was the point of Wallace’s question."
That is, Comey was saying: As long as he doesn't know that she knows what she's saying isn't true, he has "no evidence" that she's lying.
And, in Kessler's view, Hillary was lying when she said Comey said she told the truth.
But I want Kessler to do a fact check on whether Comey was lying when he said that there was "no evidence." Evidence is anything that gets you closer to knowing a fact in issue, and there is a basis to infer that Hillary knew what she was saying was false.
Otherwise, how does Kessler know that Hillary was lying when she said what she thought Comey said about her? Maybe she really believes it. Who can know?