State Dept. Gets Libya Emails That Hillary Clinton Didn’t Hand Over

[Purveyor]

Source: New York Times

WASHINGTON — Despite claims by Hillary Rodham Clinton that she gave the State Department all of her work-related emails from the personal account that she used exclusively when she was in office, the department said on Thursday that it had received several related to Libya that she had not handed over.

The disclosure is the first significant evidence to raise questions about whether Mrs. Clinton deleted emails from the account that she should have given to the State Department because they were government records.

The State Department said that in comparing emails from Sidney Blumenthal, a confidant of Mrs. Clinton’s, to the ones she gave to the department, officials could not find nine and portions of six others. At the time they were exchanging the emails, Mr. Blumenthal did not work at the State Department but was routinely providing her with intelligence memos about Libya, some with dubious information, which Mrs. Clinton circulated to her deputies.

The disclosure is likely to increase pressure on the House speaker, John A. Boehner of Ohio, from fellow Republicans to subpoena the server that housed the personal email account. Mrs. Clinton has said that last year she gave the State Department about 30,000 emails that were related to her work as secretary of state. She said that she deleted roughly the same number of emails from the account, saying those messages “were private, personal” ones about her daughter’s wedding, her mother’s funeral, family vacations and yoga.

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/26/us/state-dept-gets-libya-emails-that-clinton-didnt-hand-over.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=first-column-region

[antigop]

1. why was Blumenthal providing her with "intelligence memos about Libya"? nt

[hrmjustin]

4. I think he had business interests there.

[MisterP]

7. investment tips?

[joshcryer]

8. Bored old man.

Read his emails to her (they're public). I was actually surprised that HRC forwarded / read them (only a small number she forwarded though).

[cstanleytech]

2. Benghazi!!!!!!!!!

[7962]

3. And nothing will happen. The Clintons wont turn over that server.

Its probably in 1000 pieces by now. Or buried in Giants stadium.

[JonLP24]

5. What do the e-mails say?

Is that available anywhere? Not interested in Benghazi but the real reasons for going into Libya but it seems pretty obvious because he nationalized oil production back in the 1960s.

[JonLP24]

6. This is what I could find

What Sidney Blumenthal’s Memos to Hillary Clinton Said, and How They Were Handled

In 2011 and 2012, Hillary Rodham Clinton received at least 25 memos about Libya from Sidney Blumenthal, a friend and confidant who at the time was employed by the Clinton Foundation. The memos, written in the style of intelligence cables, make up about a third of the almost 900 pages of emails related to Libya that Mrs. Clinton said she kept on the personal email account she used exclusively as secretary of state. Some of Mr. Blumenthal’s memos appeared to be based on reports supplied by American contractors he was advising as they sought to do business in Libya. Mr. Blumenthal also appeared to be gathering information from anonymous Libyan and Western officials and local news media reports. What follows are descriptions of some of the memos and how they were handled by Mrs. Clinton and her aides.

Clinton Says Idea on Rebels Should Be Considered

In April 2011, Mr. Blumenthal sent Mrs. Clinton a memo about the rebel forces fighting the regime of Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi. The rebels, Mr. Blumenthal wrote, were considering hiring security contractors to train their forces. Mrs. Clinton forwarded the memo to her aide, Jake Sullivan, and said that the idea should be considered. (Pages 1-3)

In 2011 and 2012, Mrs. Clinton forwarded 18 memos to Mr. Sullivan, who in turn circulated them to senior State Department officials, including Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens, who was killed in the 2012 attacks in Benghazi, and Ambassador Gene A. Cretz, who preceded him.
An Alert to Possible Terrorist Attacks in Libya

In May 2011, Mr. Blumenthal sent Mrs. Clinton a memo reporting that affiliates of Al Qaeda in Libya were plotting attacks in revenge for the United States’ killing of Osama bin Laden. Mrs. Clinton forwarded the email to Mr. Sullivan, saying that it was “disturbing, if true.” Mr. Sullivan questioned its accuracy, but said he would share with others. (Pages 4-5)
Highlighting the Role of a Potential Business Partner

In January 2012, Mr. Blumenthal wrote to Mrs. Clinton about challenges facing Libya’s new government. In the memo, Mr. Blumenthal said that Libya’s prime minister was bringing in new economic advisers, and that a businessman, Najib Obeida, was among “the most influential of this group.” At the time, Mr. Obeida was a potential business partner for a group of contractors whom Mr. Blumenthal was advising. Mrs. Clinton instructed Mr. Sullivan to ask for a response from senior State Department officials including Mr. Cretz, then the ambassador to Libya. (Pages 6-15)
A Memo Is Passed On, Despite Questions

In March 2012, Mrs. Clinton forwarded a memo by Mr. Blumenthal to Mr. Sullivan, saying that she was dubious about its content. Mr. Sullivan agreed, stating that Mr. Blumenthal’s report resembled “a conspiracy theory” — but still asked State Department officials to review it. (Pages 16-17)

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/19/us/politics/what-sidney-blumenthals-memos-to-hillary-clinton-said-and-how-they-were-handled.html

Security contractors? I'm guessing Academi was referred or not aware of another outfit that does that job aside from Greystone who is part of the same Blackwater family. Interested in the economic advisers info and really hate the contractors -- particularly the way the operate in that region using exploited labor. I find it odd though what did he consider a conspiracy theory? He seems to be living in a conspiracy theory.

[leveymg]

9. Evidence State Dept was involved in organizing the rebellion from early April '11

Last edited Sat Jun 27, 2015, 02:21 PM - Edit history (15)

This latest tranche of withheld and redacted "personal" emails from Sidney Blumenthal to Secretary Clinton shows he was part of efforts to overthrow the Ghadaffi regime from nearly the beginning, working as a liaison between the USG, western corporations, and Blackwater-type mercenaries to train and coordinate the uprising. The NYT summarizes some of his April 2011 email to Clinton this way:
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/19/us/politics/what-sidney-blumenthals-memos-to-hillary-clinton-said-and-how-they-were-handled.html

In 2011 and 2012, Hillary Rodham Clinton received at least 25 memos about Libya from Sidney Blumenthal, a friend and confidant who at the time was employed by the Clinton Foundation. The memos, written in the style of intelligence cables, make up about a third of the almost 900 pages of emails related to Libya that Mrs. Clinton said she kept on the personal email account she used exclusively as secretary of state. Some of Mr. Blumenthal’s memos appeared to be based on reports supplied by American contractors he was advising as they sought to do business in Libya. Mr. Blumenthal also appeared to be gathering information from anonymous Libyan and Western officials and local news media reports. What follows are descriptions of some of the memos and how they were handled by Mrs. Clinton and her aides.

Clinton Says Idea on Rebels Should Be Considered

In April 2011, Mr. Blumenthal sent Mrs. Clinton a memo about the rebel forces fighting the regime of Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi. The rebels, Mr. Blumenthal wrote, were considering hiring security contractors to train their forces. Mrs. Clinton forwarded the memo to her aide, Jake Sullivan, and said that the idea should be considered. (Pages 1-3)

In 2011 and 2012, Mrs. Clinton forwarded 18 memos to Mr. Sullivan, who in turn circulated them to senior State Department officials, including Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens, who was killed in the 2012 attacks in Benghazi, and Ambassador Gene A. Cretz, who preceded him.

Doesn't sound comical or non-lethal to me. But, what it shows is that by early April, the State Dept. had already taken the lead, at least publicly, in aiding the Libyan opposition. The President didn't authorize "non-lethal" aid until April 26th, and that, we were told at the time, did not include training the rebels: http://foreignpolicy.com/2011/05/11/libyan-rebels-get-first-tranche-of-u-s-aid-10000-mres/

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton boasted last month about the decision to start giving non-lethal aid to the Libyan rebel army. Yesterday, the rebels got their first delivery: 10,000 packets of pre-packaged food, what the military calls Meals Ready to Eat (MREs).

"This shipment, authorized under the President’s April 26th drawdown, consisted of more than 10,000 halal meals ready to eat, so-called MREs, that were transferred from Department of Defense stocks in support of the [Transitional National Council]’s efforts to protect civilians and civilian-populated areas under the threat of attack," State Department spokesman Mark Toner told reporters at Tuesday’s briefing.

The meals are part of the $25 million in non-lethal aid to the Libyan rebels the White House approved on April 26. That approval came 11 days after the State Department notified Congress that it wanted to spend the funds to help the Libyan rebel army fight off the forces of Col. Muammar al-Qaddafi.

"One of the reasons why I announced $25 million in non-lethal aid yesterday, why many of our partners both in NATO and in the broader Contact Group are providing assistance to the opposition, is to enable them to defend themselves and to repulse the attacks by Qaddafi forces," Clinton said April 21.

But while the State Department’s notification said the money would go to things like "vehicles, fuel trucks and fuel bladders, ambulances, medical equipment, protective vests, binoculars, and non-secure radios" — all items identified by the Libyan opposition’s Transitional National Council (TNC) as urgently needed — now the list is much more weighted to humanitarian goods.

Toner said Tuesday that the shipments were meant to be in "support of the TNC’s efforts to protect civilians and civilian-populated areas under the threat of attack." More items are en route to Benghazi, including medical supplies, uniforms, boots, tents, and personal protective gear, he said.

"We continue to work with the TNC to determine what additional assistance requirements we might be able to support in the coming weeks," said Toner.

In fact, by the time the State Department acknowledged the delivery of "non-lethal" US aid to Libya, special emissary Chris Stevens had already settled in in Benghazi, where he immediately commenced coordination of US assistance to rebel groups. Plans were clearly afoot by April 1 to send Stevens to Eastern Libya, and the danger posed by by US aid to Jihadist extremist groups being doled out by arriving State Dept. personnel. The Department briefing ended on this ominous note: http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/dpb/2011/04/159596.htm

QUESTION: Well, who are you hoping would inform you if they are infiltrated by extremists, or if the opposition is?

MR. TONER: I’m not sure I know how to answer that question. I mean, look, these are professional diplomats who are conducting these kinds of outreaches, and so these are – they’re used to assessing political environments and political opposition groups, and their judgment is sound. Is that it?

QUESTION: Is the State Department envoys already on ground in the eastern part of (inaudible)?

MR. TONER: I’m sorry, the State Department?

QUESTION: (Inaudible).

MR. TONER: Not yet.

QUESTION: Not yet.

Three weeks later, at a April 21 press briefing, State Dept. spokesman Mark Toner alluded to the release of the $25 tranche of US aid to opposition groups in that eastern Libyan city: http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/dpb/2011/04/161440.htm#LIBYA

MR. TONER: Well, and just to answer your last question first, it’s actually drawdown – this is drawdown assistance from items already in government stocks. And these are based on what our special representative on the ground in Benghazi has assessed by talking to the TNC, the Transitional National Council – assessed their needs to be. And we’re trying to meet their needs in a coherent and appropriate way. We don’t want to give them things they don’t necessarily need. We want to try to focus our assistance. And this is the kind of equipment that they identify will be most helpful.

A few questions later, Toner responded to a second question about Stevens and the State Department team that had arrived in Benghazi:

QUESTION: Is it true that there’s exactly three State Department personnel on the ground in Benghazi?

MR. TONER: That’s a good question. I’m not sure how big the DART team is there. Is that what you’re talking about in addition to Chris Stevens?

QUESTION: Yeah.

MR. TONER: I’ll have to confirm that figure. Sorry, I’ll get back to you, Josh.

Note that, as the NYT reported, Blumenthal's emails to Clinton were routed to Stevens, among other Department officials assigned to Libya. This would indicate that both Clinton and Stevens were aware of private contractor plans to train opposition militias.

In addition, Blumenthal's emails to Hillary confirm what he had learned about the activities of the military and intelligence services of Egypt, Qatar, Britain and France in providing direct military assistance to the rebels, and MI6's ongoing mechanizations to replace the regime with figures backed by London.

In an April 8 email to Clinton, titled in part, "Egypt moves in", Blumenthal describes the intervention of Egyptian special forces in the civil war, and the their training and equipping of the opposition. He also explicitly warned about the danger in Libya of the rise of the very same al-Qaeda groups that would later coalesce into ISIS: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/05/19/us/politics/libya-related-messages-hillary-clinton-email-account.html?action=click&contentCollection=Politics&module=RelatedCoverage®ion=Marginalia&pgtype=article

Here, Sid references a meeting he had earlier that day with a member of the opposition:



According the UK Telegraph, Blumenthal had an active line of information into "UK game playing" in the uprising and plans to "break up" Libya, news that he passed on to Secretary Clinton. Not surprisingly, this email was also withheld: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/hillary-clinton/11616018/Britain-hid-secret-MI6-plan-to-break-up-Libya-from-US-Hillary-Clinton-told-by-confidante.html

Britain acted deceitfully in Libya and David Cameron authorised an MI6 plan to "break up" the country, a close confidante of Hillary Clinton claimed in a series of secret reports sent to the then-secretary of state

Sidney Blumenthal, a long-time friend of the Clintons, emailed Mrs Clinton on her personal account to warn her that Britain was "game playing" in Libya.

Mr Blumenthal had no formal role in the US State Department and his memos to Mrs Clinton were sourced to his own personal contacts in the Middle East and Europe.

Nevertheless, Mrs Clinton seems to have taken some of his reports seriously and forwarded them on to senior diplomats working at the highest levels of American foreign policy.

The first of Mr Blumenthal's Libya memos - which were leaked to the New York Times - was sent on April 8, 2011, as rebel forces struggled to make gains against Gaddafi's troops, and had "UK game playing" in the subject line.

On April 21, the first known report of intervention on the side of the rebels by foreign "mercenary" forces from Egypt was published: http://www.eurasiareview.com/21022011-civil-war-in-libya-gaddafi-uses-pak-and-bd-mercenaries/ Three weeks later, the Washington Post reported that Qatar was training and equipping the rebellion's militias in Eastern Libya, as well as conducting airstrikes. http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle-east/qatari-military-advisers-on-the-ground-helping-libyan-rebels-get-into-shape/2011/05/11/AFZsPV1G_story.html

Why wouldn't Hillary want to withhold this and related email? Think about it.

[Autumn]

10. I doubt the e mails are shit but she gave the republicans just what they wanted.

Should she win it will be 4 years of republican bullshit hearings and nothing gets done. Fuck, that's the last thing this country and the people need.

[karynnj]

12. True, but it will depend on how the media and "pundits" respond to it

The problem is not THESE missing emails or parts of emails, but the fact that they do make the case that the full record is not there and the first paring down the emails was done by Hillary people not working for the government.

There are possible innocent reasons for them not being there. The easiest being that the process she chose involves a lot of handling of the email and people sorting what could have been over 100,000 pieces of paper. (An argument can be made for this being accidental if when examined, there is nothing negative or embarrassing there. When they are made public, I'm comfortable that someone will ask that.)

However, as you say, this gives the Republicans exactly what they want. It shows that the record is not complete and it makes it easier to argue that her people did leave things out. Not to mention, I think many - open to seeing something as possibly a bad decision - will see this as part of a very long term pattern of secrecy on HRC's part - going back to things like the secret process she and Magaziner used to develop her healthcare bill.

Three VERY BAD decisions were:
1) Using a private email server in the first place.

2) Commingling personal and state email in one account (Note that with her own server clearly there was nothing that prevented her using 2 addresses -- and accessing both through the same phone. Had she done this, it would not have taken several months to comply with the State Department request for the emails and they would have been complete --- better yet, there would have been no reason to do anything other than to transfer them electronically - saving the State Department lots of time and money. )

3) Announcing (and presumably doing) the wiping of the server after splitting the data and deleting everything not given to the State Department. There may have been NOTHING in what was not given to the SD that would be a problem, but this would be like Nixon destroying the tapes at a point where there were already demands to produce them. I know how the 1970s me would have reacted to that!

This is a self inflicted wound and time will tell whether it will further damage whether people can trust her. I know of at least one senior citizen, who worked in government, who previously lit up when HRC was mentioned as she had great respect and wants a woman President, who was deeply troubled by this before yesterday and very upset yesterday. Yes, I know this is anecdotal, but I wonder how many government or corporate workers - all of whom abided by email protocols - will be troubled by this. A big problem is that there is and was NO good defendable explanation of why this unusual action was done other than to be able to - after the fact - remove things that in retrospect look not so good.

[Autumn]

13. She's Hillary Clinton, she's Bill Clinton's wife.

Now how do people think the media and "pundits" will respond to it? The republicans will have a field day with it. Have people forgotten what they did to Bill Clinton? And Bill? He knew how to beat them at their nasty game and still come out smelling like a rose, Hillary doesn't have that skill.

[karynnj]

15. Beyond that, she is the leading 2016 Democrat nominee AND this reflates to a Republican myth of why

lost 2102. Either one of these would make it certain that the Republicans and the right have a field day.

On the latter , imagine that John Kerry or some other non HRC was Secretary of State in the first term and it came out HE/SHE used a personal server and did not hand over emails until after extensive negotiations with the SD and then gave them the emails on paper rather than electronically. My guess is that 2016 candidate HRC, which she would have done even if she were still Senator Clinton, would likely have been among the first to throw that SoS under the bus when the controversy arose.

I completely understand that she has been a target - as has Bill - since 1992. In some ways, this - like Monica - is a self inflicted wound. The sad thing is that her motivation was likely to be able to completely control the record and avoid giving the right things to us --- yet, this does exactly the opposite. (Just as Monica was not what Starr was appointed to investigate; it is possible that this email handing is this year's "Monica" --- and just as there was nothing criminal about White Water, there is no Benghazi smoking gun.)

My comment - which should have been more explicit - is what the real mainstream, non right wing media makes of whether this is important. It also matters what people - who are neither lockstep Republicans or Democrats - think of this. For many, they know either government or corporate guidelines that they followed themselves. I think this was a problem, but just as I was prepared but not happy about having to vote for Torrecelli in 2002 (until he was replaced by the awesome lautenberg), I will vote for HRC in the general election if she is the nominee.

[leveymg]

16. What will "stick" in the public perception is that she misled us about the US role in the breakup of

Libya and Syria and in creating the conditions for the rise of al-Qaeda groups that coalesced into ISIS. Blumenthal's emails explicitly warned about that in Libya as early as April 8, 2011, before the President had even authorized "humanitarian aid" to the opposition.

[Autumn]

17. I get what you are saying.

If Hillary is the nominee it is going to rejuvenate the republicans in the House and the Senate like nothing else will. I don't think that Hillary did anything wrong here but I don't want to spend the next year or the next 4 years should she actually win the General election defending her. There are things that need to be done and playing defense all the time will get us nowhere.

[candelista]

11. "Portions"?

From the article:

The State Department said that in comparing emails from Sidney Blumenthal, a confidant of Mrs. Clinton’s, to the ones she gave to the department, officials could not find nine and portions of six others.

HRC's staff did some close editing of those emails, deleting some portions and leaving others. It would be interesting to see the portions she deleted. That would give us some idea of the kind of thing she and her staff wanted to hide.

[karynnj]

14. It might not have been close editing

I know nothing of her email, but looking at my own, there are many emails that contain the entire email trail of back and forths. It could be that in printing them out, they cut off the past stuff - that should have in their "own" email - incoming or outgoing.

If innocent, this is a good reason that this should have transmitted electronically - giving the State Department all the original stuff. The fact that they could not find all or portions of the emails, explains why it took the State Department team - of 12 full time people - 4 days to thoroughly check that they were not given these emails. They likely had to go back to the original 55000 pages that they laboriously scanned in being careful to get everything in correctly.

Another thing this does is to INSURE that the very costly effort putting everything given online will not end questions while running the risk that they miss even one line that should have been redacted. This was a cynical, cavalier response by Clinton in full CYA mode.