Over 1,000 Clinton Documents Released, Including 84 New Classified Emails

[Judi Lynn]

Source: NPR

Over 1,000 Clinton Documents Released, Including 84 New Classified Emails
February 13, 2016·8:11 PM ET
Jessica Taylor - Square 2015

The latest batch of Hillary Clinton's emails from her time at the State Department includes 84 additional classified documents.

The new emails from her controversial private server, which were retroactively classified since she left office, include 81 which had been upgraded to confidential status and three to secret status. (Classified parts were redacted.)

The Saturday release included 1,012 new pages and 551 additional documents, bringing the total released to 45,830 pages, according to a State Department official. The total means nearly 1,700 emails on Clinton's server have been retroactively classified.

The court-ordered release by the State Department is behind the initial end of January deadline. As a result, more of the Democratic presidential candidate's emails will be released throughout this month, with the final batch coming out on February 29th — the day before Super Tuesday, where 15 states will cast primary or caucus ballots.


Read more: http://www.npr.org/2016/02/13/466686230/over-1-000-clinton-documents-released-including-84-new-classified-emails

[kryptoniandawn]

1. So...

So is it still the case that none of her emails her classified prior to the email scandal? I'm very unclear on this point. If they are using partisan BS to retroactively classify them all, that's childish and ineffectual. But if they were always classified, then she's got a lot to answer for.

[Duckhunter935]

4. it gets sticky

But if you knew it was likely classified, that is still a problem. I deal with classified info and it is in every brief.

[Yupster]

13. What if Hillary sent classified info to Huma or Sullivan

Of course it would be classified retroactively. How could it have been classified ahead of time? Who would even know it was sent except for those two.

To me it seems that would be a clear legal vulnerability.

[Duckhunter935]

16. well there are published guides

On what type of information is classified and the level of classification. People granted clearance are expected to know the contents of these and follow them. That information should only be shared via the classified networks.

[Yupster]

20. So the question is did they follow those guides

So why do they keep saying it wasn't classified at the time?

Some of it couldn't have been classified since it was just between their group and the rest they need to know.

[Duckhunter935]

21. does not matter where it originates or

Who gets it. It is possible it was classified when generated but not properly marked and safeguarded .

[alfredo]

26. Did she send or just received the retro e-mails?

[Duckhunter935]

29. not sure but if recieved it is called spillage

And there are clear procedures for isolating and reporting. Failure to do so is a serious issue. We had one where someone scanned and sent email to several people. Copier/scanner pulled of the network and hard drive confiscated. All recipients computers removed from net and hard drives confiscated. I am sure more happened on the print server and mail servers. Serious business.

[alfredo]

30. But if it wasn't classified when sent, and she deleted it, then what?

[Duckhunter935]

35. nothing if indeed it was not classified

If it met the classification and just not properly marked it very well could be an issue as it is up to the person receiving to safeguard, isolate and report to the security officer

[alfredo]

40. She did wipe her hard drive. Of course she was criticised for that.

[Duckhunter935]

42. she tried to wipe the server, but the FBI

Was able to recover it. However if classified spillage is found to have happened, it is not her job to do anything except turn it over to the network and security personnel.

[restorefreedom]

24. the classified designation is based on the content..

it doesn't matter how it was or was not marked

content determines markings, markings do not determine content. which is why she keeps saying "i never sent anything MARKED classified." she never says "i never sent anything AT ALL that was classified." she knows the difference and is trying to doublespeak and hoping we are not paying attention.

at least that is how a lawyer on tv explained it

[alfredo]

44. Things have been classified even after it hit the New York Times.

Could Grassley go after her if she possessed that issue of the NYT?

[restorefreedom]

45. i wouldn't imagine so.

but there is a difference with something that was given(i hope we are talking released and not leaked) and things that were under the control of her office.

[alfredo]

46. Reported first on foreign press, then the NYT. This was during the GWB regime.

I don't think she has released any classified info.

[restorefreedom]

47. do unsecured emails pose a concern to you?

there are two issues..

whether classified info was given intentionally to someone who should not have it. no one is claiming she did that.

whether classified info was not cared for or protected properly enabling someone who should not have access to have access. that is the problem here.

obviously intent would make things worse and raise the stakes to espionage. no one is accusing her of that. but if sloppy servers and bad handling let things out, that is bad and may be criminal.

[alfredo]

48. Yes they do. But why should she secure e-mails that weren't classified.

Did she have her server and personal PC wiped? Is that the proper course of action if there could be classified info present?

I remember the 68 Chicago riots became classified, all mention was censored, even magazines mentioning them was confiscated.

[restorefreedom]

62. she is well,aware of what is sensitive info

whether it is "marked" or not

[alfredo]

66. After working in Intel, I realized that Catch 22 was a documentary.

Out of the blue, they told us that TTY feeds of the AP and UPI were on a need to know basis, and we didn't have the need to know. That was our only uncensored news outlet outside of shortwave. That was over classification. The only reason could have been that what came across those feeds were not the "official story."

I am not going to buy the Republican spin on Hillary. They have been trying to nail her ass to the floor since the early nineties. If it appears that Sanders is going to win, they will try the same guilt by innuendo tactics they used against all Democrats.

[restorefreedom]

67. i am going to go out on a limb here and say you were probably not

the head intel person in your organization. no offense intended, i just mean to suggest that only a few people have the kind of high position as the sos. if you did, then you know how important all of this is. if we can't count on the top person to take every precaution to be able to identify and protect sensitive info, how can we fairly expect such abilities of lower ranked positions?

no doubt the republicans are having a field day, but their glee about the situation does not by itself remove the possibility that there were some serious issues and possible breaches, some perhaps even criminal.

we will just have to see how it all shakes out when the fbi is finished.

[napi21]

52. NO, they don't bother me at all.

First, I believe all the emails in question were classified retroactively. The FBI has said as much. Second, NO ONE, even the PUBS have cited any damage of any kind to anyone, or any department, and this all happened...HOW MANY YEARS AGO? You really cant say, or we don't know yet!

This is a bunch of political crap IMO.

[restorefreedom]

63. well, if its crap, the fbi investigation will yield squat.

if its something, we will all find out soon enough

[Kip Humphrey]

27. Any time the government discovers an unclassified document that contains classified information,

that unclassified document is immediately given the proper secrecy classification appropriate to the information contained therein. That is what is going on. There is nothing childish or ineffectual here, except for misdirection and misinformation.

[alfredo]

32. Sometimes things are classified to spare an entity from embarrassment.

It has nothing to do with national security.

[Kip Humphrey]

34. not speaking to motivation, only process. Too many are making mystery of a clear process.

[alfredo]

39. Why aren't they going after past Sec of State's that had their own personal e-mail accounts?

[Kip Humphrey]

41. I guess... because, republicons.

[alfredo]

43. They would never play politics with national security would they?

/sarcasm

[Yo_Mama]

65. Some of them were classified (confidential) on origination. At least a few

seem to have always been classified.

It is the information, not the particular document, which is classified.

There is one email from Hillary instructing a subordinate to remove the header from a classified doc and to send it to her unclassified.

[leftofcool]

2. Retroactively classified. Not new. More smear crap from Grassley

[Duckhunter935]

5. it may have been classified at the time

And just not marked.

[alfredo]

49. Whose fault was that?

[Duckhunter935]

57. whoever wrote the email

And whoever recieved it and was knowledgeable of it being classified.

[eomer]

19. The emails included information that was classified at the time they were sent.

Now the emails are being marked as classified. But information sent in them was classified at the time they were sent, which is what matters.

[dorkzilla]

53. Apparently she instructed an aide to strip the classified tag from a document at least once

In one email exchange dated June 2011, Clinton instructed her top policy advisor Jacob Sullivan to send her talking points — which were scheduled to be forwarded over the State Department's secured network — over a non-secure fax line. Sullivan reported a problem with the State Department's secure transmission system, so Clinton told him to wipe off any "identifying heading" and send it over using a regular fax line.

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20160112/06423633305/latest-email-dump-shows-hillary-clinton-telling-aide-to-send-classified-documents-over-unsecure-fax-line.shtml

Anyone but Hillary would be in jail for this.

Also I WISH people would stop saying "well Colin Powell and Condi Rice did it, too" because, as I've said time and again - WE'RE SUPPOSED TO BE BETTER THAN THAT.

[24601]

59. Grassley has no say over what is classified and what isn't. It's an executive branch decision and

classification authorities are delegated by the President.

Why would the Obama admin be smearing her when it's far more likely that they would be trying to soft-pedal it in order to portray the administration as not that bad?

[ericson00]

3. here's my take:

[erlewyne]

6. She's not hiding anything.

She just never read all of them.
Give her time for chrissakes!

[840high]

9. ....

[bluestateguy]

7. Bo-ring

[840high]

10. You think Republicans will find it boring?

[riversedge]

33. Seems Sanders fans do not find it boring either

[840high]

36. Nice evasion to my question.

[7962]

8. Move ALONG!!! Theres nothing to see here. Again.

Look at some of the info that was released the other day. if you dont think she/they knew that info was sensitive, then you're just refusing to admit reality.
But nothing will happen to hillary; one of her underlings will take the fall. Maybe even Huma

[Bernin]

11. Hillary supporters can poo poo it all they want.

And the Democratic debates can ignore it all they want.

The Republicans are not going to play ignore the elephant in the room on this.

This candidate is destroying any chance we have in 2016!

[6000eliot]

12. Well, it's done them so much good so far.

[joshcryer]

15. Oh, Clinton will be impeached the day she takes office.

There's no question about that.

[Ikonoklast]

28. Articles of impeachment will be filed as soon after Clinton taking the oath if she gets that far.

Clinton is quickly becoming unelectable, and superdelegates are taking notice.

[hoosierlib]

14. Drip...drip...drip...

Not properly storing classified material (whether labeled properly or not) on a secure system is a blatant violation of US law and protocol...criminal referral coming for HRC and her Huma...

[Vinca]

17. Even if this stuff was retroactively classified, the GOP will insist that as SOS

she should have known things are retroactively classified and not kept a hackable server in her home. It doesn't matter if other SOSs have done the same thing . . . they aren't running for POTUS. Quite frankly, she should have known better. She should have known she was serving smear on a platter up to the GOP if she ran in the future. I imagine the entire decision about the server was intended to maintain her privacy in case she decided to run for office again. What a monumental backfire. Now that the Supreme Court is immediately on the line and it does look as if she'll end up the nominee, I'm seriously pissed off.

[Ikonoklast]

31. Shows incredibly poor judgment, at best. Concealing potentially damaging information.

Willfully avoiding oversight, at worst.

[Duval]

60. Yes! +1

[madokie]

18. As Bernie said

I'm sick of hearing about her emails.

This is a republiCON witch hunt and has been from day one. The pukes are afraid of her simple as that.
The thing that worries me about Hillary is the 'CONs will continue to hound her as they did bill if she was to win the Presidency. If I had a magic wand I'd wave all this shit away and let us have a campaign based on facts and issues and this is coming from a staunch Bernie supporter.

[Akicita]

22. Scary part? This "witch hunt" is being conducted by Obama's Justice Department and

an Obama appointed Inspector General. Not Repubs. She cannot use the partisan witch hunt excuse, as you did, because her own party is doing the investigating.

I'll bet when O.J. was on his long, slow, police chase he was thinking the same as you. "If I had a magic wand I would sweep all this shit away"

[lovuian]

23. I've heard Repubs want to call in

a Special Prosecutor just because of just that point. If that happens, she is got a long battle before her

[Akicita]

25. If the FBI recommends charges and Lynch refuses to indict, the

Repubs will scream for a special prosecutor.

[840high]

38. Rest assured if that

happens it won't be just Republicans screaming. There will be public outrage.

[Akicita]

50. Agreed. Let's hope it doesn't come to that. President Obama's legacy would

be tarnished by it. As well as the independence of the Justice Dept. The Clintons tarnish everything they touch, including now Albright, Steinem, and Lewis.

[Yo_Mama]

64. The FBI reports to the Attorney General - Lynch.

I presume that if Lynch doesn't want charges there won't be any.

[Depaysement]

37. Cute double standard

The Republicans demand transparency about potentially classified emails, most of which are not material, were received by her and weren't marked classified. What was she supposed to do? Hit reply and chastise her staff for sending emails that might be classified someday?

Funny how Dick Cheney identified a CIA case officer - which essentially revealed at least some of her agents worldwide - a heinous intentional crime - without a peep from any Republican. But this gets an investigation.

I'd prefer that a SOS concentrate on the job and not try to play FOIA examiner.

[Akicita]

51. Part of her job was to protect sensitive information. Especially since she was using an unsecured

private server. You're damn right she should have chastised her staff if they sent sensitive info to her private unsecured server. That's her job.

[Depaysement]

55. That's NOT her "job"

And the fact that it isn't her job is exactly the point.

What the hell is "sensitive" information anyway? Her schedule? Please.

Bernie's right. I'm sick of hearing about Hillary's emails.

[Akicita]

56. It is the job of every single person who handles classified information to see that that information

is protected. Sensitive information would be information the government would not want exposed to foreign intelligence exploitation.
Since much of the now classified info was sent directly from Hillary's staff to her, it was up to Hilliary and the staff member to determine if the info was sensitive or maybe even classified. If the information was classified it is illegal for the staff member to send it and illegal for Hillary to store it on her private server or forward it. That simple.

[Duckhunter935]

58. unfortunately it is

As she had a clearance shad to sign this form.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_Form_312

It is everyone's job to secure classified information, even if you have no clearance but a federal offence if you do and fail to follow the agreement.

[azmom]

54. I blame Hillary for using poor judgment

In setting up a private server to do her business. She was SOS for gods sake. Her entire job is of a sensitive nature.

[Angel Martin]

61. Saturday night data dump

if there is nothing wrong here, why is the State Dept releasing this materlal on a weekend evening ?

[karynnj]

68. the judge mandated the date

Read the Friday State Department briefing at state.gov.

[DCBob]

69. And still no smoking gun.

Its a fake scandal that the media and the GOP and the Bernie bunch want to exploit.