Seven more Hillary server e-mails too secret to release in any form

posted at 10:41 am on February 4, 2016 by Ed Morrissey

The State Department has decided to withhold seven more e-mails from Hillary Clinton’s unauthorized and nonsecure homebrew system as too sensitive to release even in redacted form. That brings the total number of such messages to 29, and one member of Congress who has seen them is aghast at what may have been exposed:

“There are more than 22, and it’s not just one or two more,” Rep. Chris Stewart told the Washington Examiner, referring to the 22 emails deemed top secret by the State Department last week. “It’s a more meaningful number than that.”

Stewart said the State Department has classified seven additional emails as “top secret.” The agency will now withhold 29 emails from the public due to their sensitive content.

“These were classified at the top secret level, and in some cases, above that,” he said.

Yesterday, Stewart told Fox News what kind of information went through the server — and it’s every bit as bad as one would imagine:

“They do reveal classified methods, they do reveal classified sources, and they do reveal human assets,” he said during an appearance on Fox’s “America’s Newsroom” earlier in the day.

Be sure to watch it, as Stewart uses a hypothetical that should have eyebrows raised. “My heavens,” he tells Martha McCallum, “if I received an e-mail saying, ‘here are the names and addresses and phone numbers of ten of our undercover agents in Pakistan,’ I would know … that was classified. I wouldn’t look for a heading.” Stewart then says that his hypothetical isn’t what was found in the e-mails, but clearly Stewart believes it to be as obvious as the hypothetical suggests. And if these messages disclosed human assets, as Stewart explicitly accuses in this interview after having seen the e-mails, then it would be obvious that they could not be transmitted through or retained within an unauthorized and non-secure system.

It’s no surprise, then, that the House Oversight Committee will start an investigation into exactly what went wrong and how much damage has been done to American intelligence by the State Department — and perhaps to put some pressure on the Department of Justice:

House Oversight Chairman Jason Chaffetz says he’s forging ahead with an investigation into the federal government’s record keeping — a probe he acknowledges could put Hillary Clinton in the cross hairs.

But Speaker Paul Ryan and House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy have been clear: They believe the FBI and Justice Department should handle the investigation into Clinton’s use of personal email for government business, and that congressional involvement could disrupt the criminal probe and appear overly partisan. Taking that cue, the House Science Committee, which had planned its own investigation into Clinton’s email server, on Wednesday opted to delay its inquiry and defer to the FBI, an aide on the panel told POLITICO.

As for Chaffetz, Ryan (R-Wis.) is giving him the green light to proceed — with caution. The speaker authorized Chaffetz to investigate systematic problems within his committee’s broad jurisdiction, while making clear his preference that Chaffetz steer clear of Clinton personally.

A House probe will put the FBI’s efforts under a microscope, whether Chaffetz chooses to avoid taking on Hillary directly or not. It will also send a signal to the DoJ that simply running out the clock will not suffice. Chaffetz could choose to work on this as a probe to determine the amount of damage done by the mishandling of classified information at State — methods that had to be changed, opportunities lost, agents who had to be recalled, or even sources who might have dried up or vanished altogether. Making the damage clear will undercut any claims from Clinton and the White House of “no harm, no foul,” but more importantly will actually emphasize the need to properly protect national-security data pour encourager les autres.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

“They do reveal classified methods, they do reveal classified sources, and they do reveal human assets,” he said during an appearance on Fox’s “America’s Newsroom” earlier in the day.

Doesn’t really matter… they weren’t marked as such and dipShit is apparently too stupid to realize that the presence of such information might be worth protecting… so there!

dpduq on February 4, 2016 at 2:27 PM

I bet in the entirety of her server there isn’t one message with yoga in the content. I’d enjoy being proven wrong but would prefer it in text not pictorial.

Pistonhead on February 4, 2016 at 2:38 PM

AG Lynch is out of the office and unavailable for comment until January 20, 2017. At that time President Hillary Clinton will nominate Lynch for another term as Attorney General.

And a majority of the public won’t even care.

GarandFan on February 4, 2016 at 2:42 PM

Trey Gowdy to be ALL OVER THIS in 10 or 12 months.

jnelchef on February 4, 2016 at 2:45 PM

your characterization is… not supported

Tiaioc on February 4, 2016 at 1:56 PM

Actually, it’s your characterization that’s not supported.

That Nov 2014 report was widely seen as significantly flawed, particularly as it was released while the House Select Committee on Benghazi was still conducting it’s investigation into the terror attack. We’ve subsequently learned from the House Select Committee, that the House Intel committee ignored major pieces of information and failed to call / interview critical witnesses.

But that’s SOP for you to cherry pick the one element of out 100 that support your assertion and use it to damn the other 99 elements. It’s what craven and bankrupt trolls do.

Athos on February 4, 2016 at 3:30 PM

Tiaioc, the evidence that Hillary committed a crime is overwhelming in this case.

blink on February 4, 2016 at 3:23 PM

The craven one still probably doesn’t admit that there were any classified information in any of the emails. That the redacted sections were because of some other undisclosed reason – despite the State Department’s multiple announcements that the items were redacted / withheld because they contained classified information.

Athos on February 4, 2016 at 3:32 PM

here’s the actual report:
https://intelligence.house.gov/sites/intelligence.house.gov/files/documents/Benghazi%20Report.pdf

your characterization is… not supported

Kenny Bania on February 4, 2016 at 1:56 PM

LOL! If you had actually read what you linked to, on Page 2 (the first page of text, after the title page), the House Committee report specifically and explicitly states that the O’bama Administration (which included Hillario! at the time) propagated a false narrative on the Benghazi attack right after it happened. I assume that refers to Susan Rice going out and Lying thru her teeth on 5 separate Sunday news shows in one morning?

Thanks so much for sharing this link with us, Kenny! By using this report in support of your Heroin, by extension you’re also agreeing with that damning finding by the House panel.

F+

Del Dolemonte on February 4, 2016 at 3:41 PM

Comedy Gold!

The Des Moines Register, which endorsed Hillario! in the caucus, is now calling for…

Des Moines Register calls for audit of Sanders-Clinton result in Iowa

Del Dolemonte on February 4, 2016 at 3:46 PM

Guccifer isn’t coming to town!

avi natan on February 4, 2016 at 4:25 PM

Oops
Guccifer is coming to town!

avi natan on February 4, 2016 at 4:26 PM

The craven one still probably doesn’t admit that there were any classified information in any of the emails. That the redacted sections were because of some other undisclosed reason – despite the State Department’s multiple announcements that the items were redacted / withheld because they contained classified information.

Athos on February 4, 2016 at 3:32 PM

I think that’s obvious from the very sudden subject change in this thread once there were redactions AND someone spoke to the nature of their contents AND they went on the record as a named source… the goalposts had nowhere else to go.

The Schaef on February 4, 2016 at 4:28 PM

New bombshell NH poll from the Clinton News Network (CNN)

Bernie = 61%

Hillario! = 30%

Comedy Gold!

Del Dolemonte on February 4, 2016 at 6:06 PM

Could you add photo-shopped prison bars, pretty please?

With sugar on top?

talkingpoints on February 4, 2016 at 6:06 PM

If Hillary isn’t smart enough to recognize what is/what isn’t classified, then she isn’t smart enough to be president!

soapyjeans on February 4, 2016 at 6:20 PM

But, but, but…..I don’t care if the State Department and the Intelligence Community has officially stated that there are 1,583 emails/documents with classified information that have been found on the private email server, and have confirmed that an additional 29 with information of such a high level of classification that they cannot be released, you have no proof. No evidence of wrongdoing. Nothing. Nada. Zip. Zilch. Hillary rocks. ARRRRRRGH.

/Tlaloc

GAlpha10 on February 4, 2016 at 6:50 PM

If Hillary isn’t smart enough to recognize what is/what isn’t classified, then she isn’t smart enough to be president!

soapyjeans on February 4, 2016 at 6:20 PM

The intelligence levels of both HRC and BHO have been widely exaggerated. While both are the smartest people in the room, when they are the sole occupants, history has shown us that both have an average, if not sub-par, level of intelligence.

We have no proof, none whatsoever, of BHO’s academic achievements since he has spent millions to ensure that no one has access to his academic records from Occidental, Columbia, and Harvard Law School. We do have eye-witness accounts that have stated that although they were enrolled in the same classes, they cannot remember BHO actually attending any of those classes. Hmmmm. What’s up with that?

Then we have the “brilliant” HRC, who failed the DC Bar Exam and wouldn’t know a classified document it hit her square in the head. Actually, I think she knows very well what is/should be classified, and what is not. Basically, everything the Secretary of State sends by email that is talking about our foreign policy is classified. She’s just playing dumb.

GAlpha10 on February 4, 2016 at 6:59 PM

The intelligence levels of both HRC and BHO have been widely exaggerated.

GAlpha10 on February 4, 2016 at 6:59 PM

Perhaps not.

Mr Obama is intelligent enough to have got himself elected to the presidency twice despite having neither experience nor aptitude for the job.

Mrs Clinton is intelligent enough to have been able to leak secrets for whatever nefarious purposes for four years, apparently without the combined resources of the brightest minds of government noticing or halting her. If it hadn’t been for the Benghazi mishap she might have got away with it entirely, and she’s still a leading candidate for the presidency.

So they both seem to be smarter in some useful way (wily? cunning? scheming?) than their significant opponents and smarter than their admirers.

Now, I’ll concede that the largest public debates usually operate a low intellectual level .. but why haven’t the ‘intelligent’ conservatives been able to create their own public forum where the intellectual bar and integrity bar is higher?

YiZhangZhe on February 4, 2016 at 7:41 PM

YiZhangZhe on February 4, 2016 at 7:41 PM

The color of his skin, rather than the content of his character. That, and white, liberal guilt.

He does have some firsts, though. First admitted hard drug user elected POTUS. First admitted of friend of a domestic terrorist elected president. First person elected president that attended an anti-American church for 20 years and had the anti-American preacher perform his wedding.

Both BHO and HRC have had the advantage of a fawning press that grossly failed in its obligation to vet BHO as a candidate and have covered for HRC. If a Republican SoS had done what HRC did, we would be seeing 24/7 coverage on the cable news channels. Her lies and cover-ups would be front page on the NYT, WaPo, LAT, and others. Instead, they give a yawn and cover the infighting in the GOP, which is a story. But the HRC email and classified information breach is one of the flagrant security violations by a top government official in our nation’s history. It is 1000 times worse than what Nixon did, and I was in DC when that happened.

She wouldn’t have gotten away with it as hackers discovered that she was using a illegal, unsecure, private email system. If a hacker found out about it, you can be 100% sure that our adversaries have every single email that once resided on her server. They were probably laughing as they read her emails in real time.

In answer to your final question, I would answer NBCBSABCMSNBCCNN. That and the fact that the vast majority of journalists are admittedly liberal and have let their political convictions bias their journalistic integrity. It doesn’t matter that the “dean” of CBS, Ran “What’s the Frequency Kenneth” Rather, was a liar who tried to sway the 2004 elections with a totally fabricated story. It doesn’t matter that Brian Williams is an exaggerator of monumental proportions. Too many LIV’s watch the news on one of these networks and believe everything they say. Personally, I refuse to watch the network news because half of what they say is not true, and the other half is broadcast to fit their agenda.

GAlpha10 on February 4, 2016 at 8:36 PM

But Speaker Paul Ryan and House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy have been clear: They believe the FBI and Justice Department should handle the investigation into Clinton’s use of personal email…

…so that they can avoid any responsibility for the consequences of standing on principles and doing what is right.

Lord, give us MORE of GOP/pharisaical rectitude! Feels just like Big Gov Lib$hit LOVE.

RL on February 4, 2016 at 9:28 PM

The Government is auditing my employer’s security practices, and item number 18 on the checklist each of us employees have to fill out for the auditors is “I know that classified data cannot be placed into an unclassified e-mail”

I had to leave that question blank pending the outcome of the Clinton investigation. If she gets off free, then I know that the correct answer to the question is “NO”.

unclesmrgol on February 4, 2016 at 11:29 PM

Trey Gowdy to be ALL OVER THIS in 10 or 12 months.

jnelchef on February 4, 2016 at 2:45 PM

Gowdy’s snarling dog act has reached the ‘McConnell/Boehner knew about Benghazi arms running’ invisible fence.

jangle12 on February 5, 2016 at 9:25 AM

Did Tiaioc seriously not know that named sources had already made claims regarding the classification of the emails – and thus the reason for the redactions????

blink on February 4, 2016 at 9:17 PM

Your question presumes he does anything seriously.

The Schaef on February 5, 2016 at 9:59 AM