The Clinton Email Controversy

I haven't followed the details, but now that Trump is threatening to put Hillary in jail for using a personal email server I'd like to understand this better. This is the basics discovered after a few minutes of reading:

1. During her time as Secretary of State Hillary Clinton continued to use her personal email addresses, which are based on a server originally installed in her home during her 2008 presidential campaign. It was not a secure server until her appointment as Secretary of State in 2009.
   ​
2. Clinton never had a State Department email address.
   ​
3. Clinton used her personal server to send and receive State Department emails, including emails containing classified information, and including to people who had insufficient clearance.
   ​
4. Near the end of 2014 Clinton provided more than 30,000 emails in hardcopy form to the State Department. She withheld nearly 32,000 emails she deemed personal.
   ​
5. At the same time the backup hardware for the Clinton server was turned over to the FBI.
   ​
6. It's not clear precisely when but probably around the same time that Clinton instructed her aides to delete personal emails, apparently numbering nearly 31,000, from the server. It is not known whether those emails are available from backup. The FBI won't say. My speculation is that unless there was a backup problem, the deleted emails are available from backup.
   ​
7. Concerning deletion of personal email the Justice Department said:
   ​

   quote:

   ---

   "There is no question that former Secretary Clinton had authority to delete personal emails without agency supervision she appropriately could have done so even if she were working on a government server. Under policies issued both by the National Archives and Records Administration and the State Department, individual officers and employees are permitted and expected to exercise judgment to determine what constitutes a federal record."

   ---

   ​
8. Other former Secretaries of State have also used personal email addresses, but not to the extent of Clinton, and not with as serious lapses.
   ​
9. No other former Secretary of State has used a personal email server, though this seems a plus to me rather than the minus it is usually characterized as. A Secretary of State using a gmail or Yahoo account seems much less secure than a personal server domain. The recent Clinton email revelations from Wikileaks didn't come from Clinton's server.

--Percy

As I understand it there are two problems. One is that Clinton was both receiving and sending emails that included information already declared classified. I get the impression that the classified information was attachments, not the actual message typed by Secretary Clinton. Naturally a classified attachment could not originate on Clinton's server, but once received she could forward it and attach it to other emails she sent.The other problem is that the emails with their classified attachments remained on Clinton's server where, being outside the State Department's classified networks, they presented a continuing security risk. According to Wikipedia:

quote:

---

After allegations were raised that some of the emails in question contained classified information, an investigation was initiated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) regarding how classified information was handled on the Clinton server. 113 emails contained information which was classified at the time it was sent including 65 emails deemed "Secret" and 22 deemed "Top Secret."

---

It's worth noting that 113 out of 30,000 is a pretty good compliance rate. Wikipedia continues:

quote:

---

Nearly 2,100 emails on the server were retroactively marked as classified by the State Department. Government policy, reiterated in the non-disclosure agreement signed by Clinton as part of gaining her security clearance, is that sensitive information should be considered and handled as classified even if not marked as such.

---

In what I quote from you here I changed "classified email" to "classified information" because I'm pretty sure that's what you meant: I'm not sure if that's true. The State Department does have what they consider classified computer networks which presumably have email accounts. The security exposure was because Hillary wasn't using those. My understanding is that the State Department has both classified and unclassified computer networks, that the classified network has not been hacked, and that the State Department is working to improve the security of its classified computer networks. Hillary denies having computer expertise and couldn't argue that she used a personal server out of concerns about State Department computer security.Even had Hillary used internal State Department email addresses the odds are pretty good that there would have been continual leakage between the classified and unclassified networks. One would hope that the State Department now has email firewalls that prevent anyone sending classified information from the classified networks to anywhere outside it.But security and utility are often at odds with one another. The speed and spottiness with which clearances are issued probably comes into regular conflict with the urgency to share information, forcing people to work at bypassing the system to do what needs to be done, security concerns notwithstanding.--Percy

Hmmm. That wasn't my interpretation of what Wikipedia was trying to say. They actually comment about this is two different places, here's a fuller excerpt:

quote:

---

113 emails contained information which was classified at the time it was sent including 65 emails deemed "Secret" and 22 deemed "Top Secret." Three contained markings indicating they could be classified, although they lacked classified headers and were only marked with a small "c" in parentheses, described as "portion markings" by FBI Director James Comey.
...
The FBI investigation found that 110 messages contained information that was classified at the time it was sent. Sixty-five of those emails were found to contain information classified as "Secret"; more than 20 contained "Top-Secret" information.[90][91] Three emails, out of 30,000, were found to be marked as classified, although they lacked classified headers and were only marked with a small "c" in parentheses, described as "portion markings" by Comey.

---

I thought this meant all these emails had classified headers ("Confidential", "Secret" or "Top Secret"), except for three that had no classified headers and were only marked with a small "c" in parentheses. I've been trying to nail down whether that's correct, and it turns out I'm wrong. There seems to be a lot of confusion out there about this, and there really shouldn't be because Comey was unambiguous in his press conference:

quote:

---

Separately, it is important to say something about the marking of classified information. Only a very small number of the e-mails containing classified information bore markings indicating the presence of classified information. But even if information is not marked classified in an e-mail, participants who know or should know that the subject matter is classified are still obligated to protect it.

---

So you're right. Interestingly, nowhere in his press conference did Comey mention a "small 'c' in parentheses," and I couldn't find the original source of that information, only articles repeating it. Fox News has link to one of these emails (Banda Email), but the topic is innocuous (setting up a phone call), it's a capital "C" not a small "c" between parentheses at the bottom of the email, there's an explicit classification of "CONFIDENTIAL" near the top with a date of this year (so who knows where that came from), and this article says it was a staff error where the confidential classification should have been removed but wasn't.What I wasn't expecting as I read articles from earlier this year was how harsh the liberal press was on Hillary. No news source gave her a break. The best spin any articles put on it was that it was pretty bad. Even articles that described how the State Department and the intelligence community constantly bicker over what should be classified were very harsh. But it was often difficult to tell whether the articles understood that Comey said only three emails had any explicit indication of their confidentiality level, rather than the other interpretation too many articles seemed to make. Anyway, I don't think Hillary got a free ride from the liberal press on this issue.--Percy

I forgot that I wanted to make a couple comments about the FBI investigation. I wanted to look at the FBI report, but I could only find it in low quality non-searchable PDF at the FBI website: FBI Report on Clinton Emails. This would be too long and too painful to scan through, so if someone has a better source please post a link.In the meantime I can only go by my impressions of the FBI investigation from Comey's press conference: it seemed superficial and unnuanced.I didn't see any recognition of the bickering between government departments about what's confidential. Nor was there any recognition that the State Department has both classified and unclassified networks and that Hillary would have used unclassified networks for most of her emails had she had a State Department email address, resulting in the same security vulnerability. Nor was there any acknowledgment of emails that discussed how to share some specific confidential information given that email was inappropriate for it. Nor was there any hint of the general nature of emails touching on confidential, secret or top secret information - for example, did the emails contain actual top secret information, or were they only discussions in some way referencing a top secret subject, in a manner similar to the confidential Banda email about the time of a phone call.On the plus side, it was nice to see him say that no criminal intent was involved.I tried to find Benghazi emails at the WSJ Clinton Email Search Site, but no luck: "No matching records found"--Percy

The government's position is that classified information shouldn't exist on unclassified systems, but where did Hillary's received emails come from, and where did the sent emails go? Looking at just a few of Hillary's emails (WSJ Clinton Email Search), many were being received from and sent to email addresses at the domain state.gov, which is an unclassified network. All indications are that the State Department uses this network for most email communication, and this practice did not suddenly begin when Clinton became Secretary of State but must also have been the practice under Condoleezza Rice, who was not herself an email userBut with Clinton began exchanges of email containing classified information with an outside server. Regardless how secure Clinton's server, it represented a security hole outside State Department control. True, the State Department's unclassified network has its own security problems, but it's under State Department control.Even had Clinton used a state.gov email address, she would still have been guilty of sending and receiving classified information on an unclassified network. Rice avoided the problem by not using email, but undoubtedly during her time the State Department must have used the state.gov domain for classified information, for how else were they to communicate?So Clinton continued a practice that was already in place when she took office. Her unique fault was not that she used unclassified networks for classified information, for that practice was ongoing and probably continues to this day, but that she used her own email server, thereby exposing the State Department to potential security breaches they were unaware of.--Percy

This thread is about the Clinton email controversy. Maybe you could repost this over at The 2016 United States Presidential Election.--Percy

CNN (and the NYT and Reuters and everyone else) reports that the FBI is reviewing new emails in Clinton classified information probe. The FBI provided this information:

• More emails have been found on a device not previously available to the FBI.
  ​
• The emails are not from Clinton.
  ​
• The FBI will take "appropriate investigative steps" to determine whether the emails contain classified information or are otherwise relevant to the investigation.

--Percy

Just to be clear, you cannot be referring to the emails that were the subject of FBI Director James Comey's Friday letter to Congress. It isn't yet known what is in those emails, or even why they're relevant.I don't think we can say we know the emails were not from Hillary. This is the text of Comey's letter, and it doesn't say anything about who the emails are from or to, nor anything about their content. It only says that the emails "appear to be pertinent to the investigation":

quote:

---

In previous Congressional testimony, I referred to the fact that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) had completed its investigation of former Secretary Clinton's personal email server. Due to recent developments, I am writing to supplement my previous testimony.

​

In connection with an unrelated case, the FBI has learned of the existence of emails that appear to be pertinent to the investigation. I am writing to inform you that the investigative team briefed me on this yesterday, and I agreed that the FBI should take appropriate investigative steps designed to allow investigators to review these emails to determine whether they contain classified information, as well as to assess their importance to our investigation.

​

Although the FBI cannot yet assess whether this material may be significant, and I cannot predict how long it will take us to complete this additional work, I believe it is important to update your Committees about our efforts in light of my previous testimony.

---

The information that the emails were not from Hillary comes from a news report described here in this Slate article:

quote:

---

Here's NBC's Pete Williams (who's been covering the Justice Department for decades and is presumably well-sourced) reporting that senior officials "familiar with the thinking behind [Comey's] letter" say the newly discovered emails in question 1) were not sent by Hillary Clinton, 2) do not appear to have intentionally been withheld from the FBI, 3) were not discovered via the investigation into the John Podesta or Democratic National Committee hacks.

---

There's a video in the article where Williams says these things, I wasn't able to embed it in this message.--Percy

We know a little more today, this information is from the CNN article FBI discovered Clinton-related emails weeks ago:

• The "device" is a laptop belonging to Anthony Weimer, whose estranged wife, Huma Abedin, is a top Clinton aide now serving as vice chairwoman of Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign, and who previously served as Clinton's deputy chief of staff at the State Department.
  ​
• Though the laptop belongs to Weimer, it contains a trove of emails from his wife Huma Abedin.
  ​
• According to CNN, "Technical experts at the FBI began procedures to catalogue the emails found on one of the computers and soon found emails belonging to Abedin. The discovery surprised investigators..."
  ​
  Let me state that last part in the form of an incredulous question: The discovery of emails from Weimer's wife on his laptop surprised investigators? Were they also surprised by the discovery of Internet browsing tools, calendar programs and music mp3's? One stands amazed at the capacity of these investigators to be surprised.
  ​
• It is not yet known whether the emails have any pertinence to the Clinton probe.
  ​
• The Clinton campaign has been rocked by the news. About FBI director Comey's release of the information Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta said, "He might have taken the first step of actually having looked at them before he did this in the middle of a presidential campaign, so close to the voting."
  ​
• Even Huma Abedin expressed surprise that emails from her had turned up on her husband's laptop: "The possibility that this device contains any emails of hers is news to her," a source familiar with the investigation and civil litigation told CNN. "The device supposedly at issue now belonged to Anthony, not her."
  ​
  This makes no sense to me. People I know exchange emails and texts with their wives and husbands and other family members all the time. Are the emails from after she became estranged from her husband? Which would imply Weimer obtained them improperly?
  ​
• FBI investigators *did* read enough of the emails to decide that they possibly contained classified material. It was at that point that a new warrant was sought, since the warrant to examine the laptop only concerned information about sexting. Investigators think it likely that some of the deleted Clinton emails are on the laptop. This does strongly imply that the emails were *from* Abedin but not *to* Weimer, again implying that he obtained them improperly.

Does anyone in Washington just go about their lives and work activities without getting involved in intrigue?--Percy

Has the FBI been politicized? FBI Director Comey's 10/28 letter raised strong suspicions, but today's announcement removes a great deal of doubt. According to the NYT:

quote:

---

On Sunday, the F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, sent a letter to Congress saying an analysis of the emails found on former Representative Anthony D. Weiner’s laptop did not change the bureau’s decision from the summer that Mrs. Clinton should face no charges in the investigation of her emails.

---

Is this to be the FBI's position on the Clinton emails, that from now until the end of time the discovery of any Clinton emails on any device is grounds for public announcements that the investigation is being reopened so that a decision can be made anew about whether to charge her? This is absurd, inflammatory, defamatory and absurd. Pleh!--Percy