IG: Clinton emails contained info that was classified at the time

  • Clinton emails “contained classified State Department information when originated”
  • Some contained “Top Secret” information

–Inspector General for Intelligence Community Charles McCullough

In an apparent contradiction to repeated assertions by Hillary Clinton, an Inspector General (IG) today told Congress that some of Clinton’s emails contained information that was classified at the time she sent them as secretary of state.

In a letter dated today, IG of the Intelligence Community Charles McCullough told members of Congress and the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) that classification officials have reviewed “two additional emails” among those Clinton sent or received as secretary of state on her private server “and judged that they contained classified State Department information when originated.”

Clinton, the frontrunner presidential candidate for Democrats, has asserted: “I am confident that I never sent nor received any information that was classified at the time it was sent and received.” The statement left open the idea that some information may have been subsequently classified, but that none of it was technically classified at the time. Today’s IG letter appears to rule out that possibility.

The IG provided requesting members of Congress and the DNI with copies of several Clinton emails that contained classified information, in some cases “Top Secret.” Those have not been publicly released. The IG said that two additional emails have been referred to the State Department to determine their current classification before releasing them to Congress.

In a statement today, head of the Senate Judiciary Committee Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, said, “This information revealed by the inspector general makes it even more important that the FBI and the State Department secure these documents. To date, the two agencies most critical to securing this information have failed to assure the American people that they are taking the necessary steps to protect America’s national security interests.”

Clinton’s email practices have come under scrutiny and possible criminal inquiry after it was revealed she conducted government business as secretary of state using a private server, did not turn over all business-related emails when she left the State Department that were responsive to Congressional subpoena and Freedom of Information Act requests, and destroyed tens of thousands of pages that were not reviewed by independent parties prior to their destruction.

Even after Clinton turned over some of the missing emails to the State Department and Congress, additional emails that she allegedly had not turned over surfaced from her longtime confidant Sidney Blumenthal. Some of the emails related to the security situation in Libya prior to the terrorist attacks on the U.S. compounds in Benghazi.

Read the IG letter to Congress



, , , , , ,

13 Responses to “IG: Clinton emails contained info that was classified at the time”

  1. Terry Quinn
    August 12, 2015 at 9:46 am #

    CBS news has reported twice (last evening and again this morning) that the two new emails were NOT classified when they were created. Is CBS wrong, or is the article just above wrong? Seems that this is pretty important.

    • Danny P. Radcliff
      August 18, 2015 at 2:03 pm #

      1. The IG letter specifically states the information was marked as classified at the time of transmission on at least two emails.
      2. If you have a clearance it is you JOB to recognize information that is classified, even if not marked and take steps to safeguard it.
      3. If information you transmitted is later deemed to be classified, you are expected to help track that information down. That is why you are expected to use a government approved system, so there are logs, and electronic trails. When you use unauthorized personal equipment–this is what happens. Either way–she is in the wrong.
      4. Finally, as I wrote earlier on a different thread, it is not surprising that the information on her unclassified, personal system is not marked classified. Most, if not all the information typed there would be derived from other sources and physically retyped in–unless there was a illegal wholesale data transfer of classified data to the unclassified system. So claiming the information was not marked is a red-herring. If she read a classified document, then retyped excerpts without the markings on and unclassified system she violated the LAW.

  2. Danny P. Radcliff
    August 18, 2015 at 1:52 pm #

    A few points on Clinton’s email practice.
    1. It is a red-herring for Clinton to claim she didn’t email any information “marked” as classified at the time. Since there is no way to transfer classified emails down to an unclassified system, short of “sneaker net” (i.e. copying the emails on a disk and then deliberately transferring them to the unclass system–a felony), it should come as NO SUPRISE that none of the email were properly marked. If she read classified information, then retyped or paraphrased it un an unclassified system, without removing the information that makes it classified–then she deliberately caused “spillage”. I know many, many government personnel who have had their clearances revoked for even being remotely involved in a spillage incident.
    2. Given the shear volume of data (tens of thousands of emails), it is unlikely that all that classified data was typed in by Clinton on her Blackberry. Some on had to provide the background information, un marked so she could “do here job.” That means someone on her staff had to knowingly strip classifications from data unlawfully brought down from a classified network–someone should be going to jail. Find that person and the whole house of cards will start to collapse.
    2. When you are granted a TS/SCI clearance, you are instructed in the safe/authorized use of the data, and warned any unauthorized disclosure of said classified information may result in punitive actions. A person with such a clearance is REQUIRED to know what info falls into that category of sensitive/classified information. So, even if information is not properly marked, a cleared person is expected to recognize its true nature and take steps. I know people who lost their clearance because they didn’t recognize someone else’s mistake.
    3. Even simply sensitive information–which clearly almost all State Department emails would qualify as–REQUIRE safe guarding. Putting them on personal servers stored at your home, and then when caught sending the server to a political crone to keep in their start up IT business which they run out of their NJ apartment hardly qualifies as due diligence. CEOs and CIO would most certainly be fired and be looking at jail time if they acted in the manner the Clinton has.
    4. Finally, when spillage occurs, the clean up requires every machine touched by the spillage to be confiscated, examined and wiped clean. Everyone who ever got an email from Clinton should be getting visited by the FBI. They should all be required to sign Non-disclosure agreements and their machines be forfeited. The fact that it has taken this long for the FBI to finally be called in, is proof positive the fix is in. They are just going through the motions–just as was done with the IRS.

  3. Jennifer
    August 24, 2015 at 6:26 pm #

    99.9% of classified information is CLASSIFIED THE DAY IT IS BORN. Information hardly EVER (usually NEVER) starts out unclassified then becomes classified. Anyone who believes Hillary’s LIE that “It wasn’t classified when it was on the server” or “It became classified LATER” is an IDIOT!!!!! This is a Hillary ruse when she LIES like that because she THINKS YOU ARE STUPID ENOUGH TO BELIEVE HER LIES.

  4. Adolfo
    September 8, 2015 at 9:21 am #

    Great beat ! I wish to apprentice whilst you amend your website, how can i subscribe for
    a blog web site? The account aided me a acceptable deal. I have been a little bit
    familiar of this your broadcast provided shiny clear concept


  1. Gowdy: Clinton has turned over private email server | Sharyl Attkisson - August 11, 2015

    […] More on the Inspector General’s letter to Congress […]

  2. Oh What A Tangled Web Hillary Has Woven With Her Many And Varied Practices To Deceive *Open Thread* | Rabblerouserruminations's Weblog - August 12, 2015

    […] Sharyl Attkisson has more on this, and how the Inspector General alerted Congress to the classified nature of some of the emails: […]

  3. Hillary Clinton’s Email: the Definitive Timeline | Sharyl Attkisson - August 20, 2015

    […] 11: Inspector General report to the Senate contradicts Clinton claims; some Clinton emails, says the IG, contained information that was classified at the […]

  4. Benghazi Story Links | Sharyl Attkisson - August 20, 2015

    […] IG: Clinton emails contained classified info when originated, Aug. 11, 2015 […]

  5. 15 unsolicited observations about Hillary Clinton’s email | Sharyl Attkisson - August 23, 2015

    […] Clinton’s claims that she never sent or received any classified information. One explicitly reported to a Senate committee that some of Clinton’s emails contained information that was classified at the time it was sent, […]

  6. The Woman that wants to be President should be in Jail! | Centinel2012 - December 3, 2015

    […] 11: Inspector General report to the Senate contradicts Clinton claims; some Clinton emails, says the IG, contained information that was classified at the […]

  7. Hillary Clinton: Benghazi & Email Timeline | Aleks K. Shaw - January 26, 2016

    […] 11, 2015: Inspector General report to the Senate contradicts Clinton claims; some Clinton emails, says the IG, contained information that was classified at the […]

  8. Top news woman to Conservative Base: Hillary Clinton’s email saga’s timeline – Conservative Base - January 28, 2016

    […] 11: Inspector General report to the Senate contradicts Clinton claims; some Clinton emails, says the IG, contained information that was classified at the […]

Leave a Reply

Leave your opinion here. Please be nice. Your Email address will be kept private.