Wednesday, August 19, 2015

Two Classified Emails Sent to Hillary ID'd by Fox

Fox News is reporting that the FBI launched their investigation into Hillary Clinton's emails after learning of two emails sent to her by aides Huma Abedin and Jake Sullivan, both related to Benghazi. They were sent to Clinton's private server.

Given the description of the subject matter in the above link, there can be no doubt that the material was (or should have been) marked classified, either secret or top secret. That such material was sent and or received through a private email server is inexcusable. Yet, once again, Clinton joked about the topic when Fox's Ed Henry tried to ask her if she had wiped her server clean yesterday in Las Vegas. If there is any justice left in this country with the current Justice Department in power, she will not be laughing much longer.

Aside from being one of the biggest crooks to come down the pike, this woman has a screw loose.


elwood p suggins said...

I want to be a little careful with this, but the Washington Post has specifically related two of Hillary's e-mails to a particular intelligence program with which I happen to be personally familiar. The Post even named that program; I will not.

The thing is, not only is the information furnished by that program classified as "Top Secret" (TS), it is necessary to have a even higher security clearance (Sensitive Compartmented Information, or SCI), in order to access material from the program. EVERY scrap of paper which comes from this source bears the required/appropriate security classification markings from the get-go.

It is beyond belief that with their combined experience, Hillary, or her staff, could possibly have been ignorant of the sensitive/classified nature of this (as well as other??) material, even if someone (whoever??) had "sanitized" it by removing classifications headings before sending it to them.

Gary Fouse said...


Can you send me the link to that Wash Post article? I couldn't find it.

elwood p suggins said...

Don't know if I still have it, but will try to find it.

elwood p suggins said...

Gary--this got a little involved. Looks like McClatchy reported it, then Chris Cilliza of the Post reported on their reporting (seemingly validating it??), the next day, and then RedState reported on the McClatchy reporting the next day, using the nomenclature I referenced. I guess the Post stuck in my feeble mind as the original reporter. Sorry, but the facts are apparently still there, no??