Posted on 08/16/2015 7:36:57 PM PDT by jazusamo
When State Department officials first discovered that Hillary Rodham Clintons personal email account contained classified information, they did not seize the thumb drive containing her digitally archived inbox but rather provided her attorney a special safe to secure the device, according to interviews and documents.
The move allowed Mrs. Clintons attorney to keep the device for several additional weeks while State officials reviewed paper copies of the emails for possible classified data. Officials were unconcerned that the thumb drive remained out of their possession because preservation orders from courts and Congress would ensure that her attorney would not destroy the evidence. The digital archive was turned over to the FBI for examination this month.
Throughout the review process, career State officials who normally handle the release of data under the Freedom of Information Act ran into disagreements with attorneys about which information in the emails was classified, The Washington Times has learned.
The disagreements are part of a complex, and at times tense, process in which career lawyers and career FOIA officials, along with a dozen intelligence review analysts from different agencies, are trying to identify and protect intelligence information contained in Mrs. Clintons personal email account. State and FOIA lawyers normally work together on such requests, but this case has heightened tensions given Mrs. Clintons status as the Democratic presidential front-runner.
The ongoing process has already flagged 60 of Mrs. Clintons personal emails as containing classified information at the confidential or secret level, although a debate is raging over additional emails that the intelligence community and career State officials believe contain more sensitive top-secret data, officials confirmed.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
You can’t handle the truth!
Thanks jazusamo.
Withholding evidence evidently nuanced for Ms Clinton.
It would be difficult if not impossible for an ethical attorney to represent Hillary.
This is insane.
Did the lawyer have access to the drive? Does he hold a TSI/SCI/SI etc class? Basically we allowed unvetted sensitive info to be unsecured for months. The government is our worst enemy in this fiasco. Clinton is a crook. DOJ/DOS all are negligent. Clinton was a servant of the people, not some royalty.
Imagine four years of this kind of this crap.
Bump.
I think he’s explaining to Eldumb BO that his elbow is breaking down during his swing and that’s why everything is going left. Left like his chit policies.
Hillary absolutely is a crook along with all her cohorts.
The question to ask her is, “Which computer did you use to read and send classified emails”. We know she didn’t use the secure one and she said she didn’t use her personal server. Time to pin her down.
HRC spent her 4 years as SOS and never came in contact with classified material./s
A special safe! Did they just build a new mobile SCIF device without me finding out about it?
Exactly the same way any one of us would be treated in the same situation, right?
Its obvious that a spillage has occurred. And the proper responses were not followed. Its blatant disregard for well established and documented security policy.
And its not a safe. Its a security container.
Who is the security officer in charge of those holding the clearances? He should be have his clearance revoked, be immediately fired and prosecuted.
That’s my question too. If that’s not a TS/SCI cleared lawyer, giving him the thumb drive was yet another massive, felonious security breach. And she has no even-nominal excuse this time because she gave it to him AFTER it was publicly known there was classified data in it!
Maybe he'll flip out?
Somebody get that boy a his & her pair of Walther PPS's.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.