Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Former NY Times Editor Jill Abramson hasn’t been following the Hillary email story
Hot Air.com ^ | March 21, 2016 | JOHN SEXTON

Posted on 03/21/2016 11:35:59 AM PDT by Kaslin

Former NY Times editor Jill Abramson gave an interview to Politico’s Glenn Thrush in which she suggested the Hillary Clinton’s email story did not seem like a very big deal because all of the emails were “classified after the fact.” In fact, two Inspectors General said that was not the case 8 months ago. From Politico:

“It depends on, you know, what your definition of ‘big deal’ is, but I’m not going to play Bill Clinton for you here,” she said, referring to the former president’s infamous what-the-meaning-of-is-is monologue during his Monica Lewinsky deposition. “The issue, to me, that’s at the crux is that everything that we know that was classified was classified after the fact, after the emails were sent. And so, why is that a big deal?”

It’s true that the State Department and the Clinton campaign have been saying for months that everything found in on her server was classified retroactively so it’s perhaps not surprising that some people have that impression. However, the Inspectors General for the State Department and the Intelligence Community said last July that some of the material in the emails was classified at the time it was sent. Here is an excerpt from the statement released by the Inspectors General on July 24, 2015 [emphasis added for Jill Abramson]:

The IC IG found four emails containing classified IC-derived information in a limited sample of 40 emails of the 30,000 emails provided by former Secretary Clinton. The four emails, which have not been released through the State FOIA process, did not contain classification markings and/or dissemination controls. These emails were not retroactively classified by the State Department; rather these emails contained classified information when they were generated and, according to IC classification officials, that information remains classified today. This classified information should never have been transmitted via an unclassified personal system.

It is also true that the State Department appealed these classifications to the Director of National Intelligence, apparently hoping the “top secret” classification would be downgraded. That appeal failed as the classification of both emails was upheld at the time they were sent (one of the emails was downgraded to “secret” but not to the time it was sent).

More recently, the Inspector General for the Intelligence Community indicated in a letter to Congress that there were several dozen emails found on Clinton’s server which the Intelligence Community has stated in “sworn declarations” were taken from “top secret” material they had generated. Here is Fox News Catherine Herridge reporting on the letter sent to congress:

“To date, I have received two sworn declarations from one [intelligence community] element. These declarations cover several dozen emails containing classified information determined by the IC element to be at the confidential, secret, and top secret/sap levels,” said the IG letter to lawmakers with oversight of the intelligence community and State Department. “According to the declarant, these documents contain information derived from classified IC element sources.”

If the material was taken from “top secret” information gathered by the IC, then it was “top secret” at the time it was sent. In fact, the State Department agreed the material was too sensitive to release in any form.

The irony here is that after stating, contrary to the facts, that all of the material in Clinton’s emails “was classified after the fact,” Abramson goes on to say most people don’t seem to know any details about these controversies:

“When you actually dissect these things and moreover when you ask either voters, as I have, or my students who read about Whitewater. If you actually ask people like what about any of these controversies bothers them they don’t know anything specific about any of them. I won’t say nothing — but very little.”

Apparently that goes for former editors of the NY Times as well.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial
KEYWORDS: hillaryclinton; jillabramson; nyt; partisanmedia
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-25 next last

1 posted on 03/21/2016 11:35:59 AM PDT by Kaslin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Embarrassing lack of curiosity !


2 posted on 03/21/2016 11:38:27 AM PDT by major-pelham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

I didn’t know that the Abramsons were related to the Goebbels family. Huh; you learn something new everyday.


3 posted on 03/21/2016 11:39:37 AM PDT by henkster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: major-pelham

Like a Mafia wife.


4 posted on 03/21/2016 11:41:29 AM PDT by donna (Radicalized Christians become missionaries; then, they tell everyone that Jesus loves them!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Another Capo for Hitler. BTW, this woman looks like she’s been shot at and missed and $-it at and hit!


5 posted on 03/21/2016 11:42:35 AM PDT by vette6387 (Obama can go to hell!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

To paraphrase Chris Rock - “NY Times editors LOVE not to know!”


6 posted on 03/21/2016 11:44:30 AM PDT by dead (I've got my eye out for Carl Grimes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

NYT —> “All the News that’s fit to print,
-—Unless it’s inconvenient to the Left.


7 posted on 03/21/2016 11:46:14 AM PDT by cookcounty (Why are Trump's poll numbers against a wounded Hillary so AWFUL? Hello? No answer?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

That’s the party line. Obfuscate, obfuscate and obfuscate. Nothing to see. It’s settled. Let’s move on. Why are you wasting time on this?

EXCEPT it does matter! When the fecal material hits the fan in May and June lots of the party faithful will gag and puke claiming it smells like a rose.


8 posted on 03/21/2016 11:52:24 AM PDT by meatloaf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

“I’m not following it very closely but I just happen to have Hillary’s spin right at my fingertips.”


9 posted on 03/21/2016 11:54:00 AM PDT by Paine in the Neck (Socialism consumes EVERYTHING)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

The markings don’t matter.
The timing of the marking doesn’t matter.

The content matters.

Hillary is thoroughly trained in this aspect of the data. She has no excuse.


10 posted on 03/21/2016 11:54:56 AM PDT by ClearCase_guy (I don't know what Claire Wolfe is thinking, but I know what I'm thinking.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

No surprise. They are joined at the hip with hillary and her fellow communists.


11 posted on 03/21/2016 11:59:34 AM PDT by I want the USA back (The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those who speak it. Orwell.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

12 posted on 03/21/2016 12:06:34 PM PDT by kidd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

pong


13 posted on 03/21/2016 12:07:38 PM PDT by SWAMPSNIPER (The Second Amendment, a Matter of Fact, Not A Matter of Opinion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
I found this to be VERY interesting in regard to modern day NEWS reporting.

This was put up YESTERDAY on You Tube. I highly suggest you watch it.

This, may to a certain degree, frighten many people in terms of "what's going on.".

This most definitely is a direct WAKE UP call to EVERYONE.

 
YouTube Video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YKkuWX406q4

14 posted on 03/21/2016 12:10:25 PM PDT by VideoDoctor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

15 posted on 03/21/2016 12:10:39 PM PDT by MrBambaLaMamba (Obama - "I will stand with the Muslims")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

I am not a Govt employee, but it seems to me that anything even remotely sensitive is classified FIRST, never retroactively. I’m sure a multitude of documents are declassified, but NEVER the reverse. Hillary! et al, are depending on the stupidity of American voter to think that ANYONE would buy this manure.


16 posted on 03/21/2016 12:18:24 PM PDT by originalbuckeye ("In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." - George Orwell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kidd

17 posted on 03/21/2016 12:21:09 PM PDT by Kaslin (He needed theThe l ignorant to reelect him. He got them and now we have to pay the consequences)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: MrBambaLaMamba

What a witch.


18 posted on 03/21/2016 12:23:24 PM PDT by batterycommander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Appalling. They call themselves journalists, the paper that has not endorsed a GOP presidential candidate in 70 years since Ike (and only by shame).


19 posted on 03/21/2016 12:58:27 PM PDT by KC_Conspirator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Jill Abramson is a member of the leftwing operation.

So THAT’S why she says that.


20 posted on 03/21/2016 1:13:03 PM PDT by MarvinStinson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-25 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson