In order to understand this statement, it needs to be parsed, as we need to do in all Clinton scandals.
“This is a security review..” What is “this”? Is “this” an FBI probe, an investigation by the State Department IG, or a DoJ investigation?
“...that was requested...” Who requested the “security review”? Hillary herself? The DoJ? The FBI? The State Department? Any number of intelligence organizations? What Federal agency does a “security review”?
“....it is being carried out...” What is “it”? Is “it” a formal investigation? Who is carrying “it” out? Specifically, what Federal agencies or Legislative entities are carrying out something along the lines of a “security review”?
“....it will be resolved....” Again, what is “it”, how will “it” be “resolved”, and what is the final product to demonstrate that “it” is “resolved”? Could “resolved” mean convening a Federal Grand Jury, or selecting a special prosecutor, or going to trial, or getting a conviction, or sentencing someone for a crime?
Where are the so-called investigative reporters who exercise their precious intellectual curiosity? ::::CRICKETS::::
Paging Bob Woodward - come out of your coma and look into this!
Let’s not confuse the ephemeral of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy with the actual breaking of laws.
“This is a security review that was requested, it is being carried out, it will be resolved.” Who or what is the basis of Hillary’s emphatic declaration? How does she know this?
These are rhetorical questions to point out that everything Hillary says needs to be parsed from her legal-speak, couched comments.
Hillary setup a private e-mail server without notifying the State Dept plus paying Bryan Pagliano to do it and redirecting ALL official govt e-mails to her private server.
Thats just one of many illegal issues she is facing on the matter. Judge Napolitano spells it out so nicely in the previous link I posted.