“I never sent or received any material marked ‘classified.’”
And there you have it. Technically she might be correct, none of the emails she received or sent might have not been properly marked which attempts to do two things:
— place blame on those who sent her the ‘classified’ information for not properly marking it which,by the way, they could not legally do anyway since they were placing the information in an unsecured network;
— and for the above to work, we must believe she was ignorant on the sensitivity of the information to excuse her for forwarding it.
The goal is to deflect damage on her to some underling(s) to save herself. For this to work we have to concede the ‘smartest woman in the world’ with self proclaimed many years of accomplished work in the Federal Government could not tell what information might have been too sensitive to forward?? One or two obscure emails perhaps; not hundreds. Any prosecutor worth their weight in salt should have not problem shooting this argument down. Ignorance is no excuse for abiding by information security rules, particularly the Secretary of State with many minions to keep them inside the rails and over hundreds of instances.
Here is a government-produced guide to classified document markings from 2001. The chapter on Markings starts on page 17 with examples of classified documents shown.
“I never sent or received any material marked ‘classified.’â€
That response sounds like it could be the ‘coaching’ of disbarred, ex-lawyer Bill.
When do we hear about “Is Is” again?