Your reference states that a “non-paper” is a summary of the Talking Points actually delivered summarized by someone at the presentation. I guess that could make sense. The heading of the email could indicate the subject that the Talking Points covered, and were delivered to, and in their absence (because the couldn’t be faxed to her securely), she asked that someone prepare a summary (a non-paper) of the points delivered since she couldn’t receive the Talking Points themselves.
That’s all assumption, of course, as is the assumption that the resulting non-paper also needed to be classified, but that she ordered the classification stripped.
Look, Hillary belongs in jail, or at least needs to be booted from office, and the Dems are crazy for nominating her as their presidential candidate. But there’s a whole lot of assuming going on as regards this particular email exchange. That’s all I’m saying.
I think we’re in agreement about this. There isn’t enough information here to determine whether she ordered classification markings stripped or not. What we do know, however, is that she set up a system whereby 1300 classified documents were mishandled outside the approved, secure channels of the federal government. That’s a lot of felonies.