my take on Comey's different numbers of emails - supposedly - containing classified data

[Bill USA]

Last edited Tue Jul 19, 2016, 06:58 PM - Edit history (1)

.. those who have been trying to follow/figure-out what in the end did Dir. Comey actually say about Clinton's handling of emails while Sec of State: here is my take on Comey's statements:

In Comey's original statement, while he said the FBI recommended to not indict HRC re handling of emails and personal server.. Dir Comey went on to say that Hillary Clinton had 110 emails which had classified data in them - at the time they were sent. He also said there were three emails that "bore markings indicating the presence of classified information"

There were two groups of emails of interest:

1) A group of 30,000 emails which Sec Clinton submitted to the State Department:

"FBI investigators have also read all of the approximately 30,000 e-mails provided by Secretary Clinton to the State Department in December 2014."

___ it is from this group that Comey refers to 110 emails:

"110 e-mails in 52 e-mail chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received."

and 2) A group, from which the specifically mentioned group of 3 emails came:

"With respect to the thousands of e-mails we found that were not among those produced to State, agencies have concluded that three of those were classified at the time they were sent or received, one at the Secret level and two at the Confidential level."

https://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/press-releases/statement-by-fbi-director-james-b-comey-on-the-investigation-of-secretary-hillary-clinton2019s-use-of-a-personal-e-mail-system


[font size="3"]Now, regarding the group of three - we now know, thanks to Rep. Matt Cartwright's questioning of Comey - that they actually were NOT marked Classified - per the Govt manual on handling Classified information. - DESPITE THE FACT THEY WERE NOT MARKED WITH A HEADER INDICATING THEY CONTAINED CLASSIFIED info - as is REQUIRED BY THE RELEVANT REG/MANUAL, Comey apparently thought the letter "c" appearing in the text of an email was sufficient to declare the email contained classified info - despite the lack of a Classfied Header.[/font]

Note: Subsequent to Comey saying he considered these emails classfied, the State Dept issued a statement that the "c"s in those emails were there due to human error. So on any basis these emails did not contain classified information.


[font size="3"] Now, let's go back to the 110 emails. Apparently, it was NOT 110 separate emails that contained separate items of classified information. Apparently, it was actually 52 email CHAINS which contained classified info (which info was apparently repeated to add up to 110 instances - but not 110 separate items of classified info).

(see https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2016/07/05/six-things-we-learned-from-the-fbi-investigation-into-hillary-clintons-email/?utm_term=.170cbb2e47fb )





.. [font size="3"]So it's not 110 but 52 instances of Classified info being received/sent by Sec Clinton, right?? Wellllll, hold on a minute..[/font]

NOTICE WHAT COMEY SAID:

"From the group of 30,000 e-mails returned to the State Department, 110 e-mails in 52 e-mail chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received."

I'm not aware of anybody asking Comey about this statement - BUT - if Comey had the "owning agency" "determine" whether the emails contained classified information --- Does that mean - Comey HAD to go the the owning agencies BECAUSE THE REQUIRED HEADER INDICATING THE PRESENCE OF CLASSIFIED INFO - WAS NOT PART OF THE EMAILS? ... AS REQUIRED BY GOVT REG/MANUAL???

I'm willing to go out on a limb and say, if the FBI had to ask the owning agencies to determine if the emails contained Classified Info - then the Header which is required by the Government - WAS NOT THERE.

Which means when Hillary said she did not receive or send anything marked classified she was speaking truthfully.

... as for Dir Comey, far be it from me to declare him an untrustworthy LIAR... but how about an duplicitous OBFUSCATOR?

[The_Casual_Observer]

1. It was witch hunt and they found nothing

That was all bluster and bravado from that idiot to hide the fact that they had wasted millions of dollars.

[Bill USA]

2. unfortunately, the impression most have from Comey's statement is that there were emails found

that had classified information in them and that therefor she lied. OF course, the M$M is happy to not inform people that Comey's interrogation by Congress showed he lied -- 'er I mean obfuscated - NOT her!

This is the message that needs to get out ... somehow.

[The_Casual_Observer]

5. Comey was standing tall like a real asshole

And the press has let him get away with it.
Fortunately it won't make any difference, fox news can huff and puff all they want but the fact remains that it's over.

[DURHAM D]

3. I don't believe Hillary "sent" any classified emails to anyone.

She may have received emails from the originating entity that they later deemed to be classified but how is that her fault?

COMEY IS A BIG FAT LIAR.


Someone should tell MSNBC and CNN. They are total morons on this subject.

[Bill USA]

4. as far as I know none of the GOP golems of M$M are making it clear that there were no emails that

were marked classified received/sent by Clinton.

[NWCorona]

6. My two cents.

"Note: Subsequent to Comey saying he considered these emails classfied, the State Dept issued a statement that the "c"s in those emails were there due to human error. So on any basis these emails did not contain classified information. "

That's not quite true. When Kirby said that. The State Dept didn't have a clue if they and the FBI are talking about the same emails as the the FBI didn't deliver them yet. Also note that Kirby said that the State was aware of 2 instances of human error not 3. So there is one confidential email unaccounted for.

"At a regular briefing for reporters Wednesday, Kirby said State is aware of two instances in the set of roughly 30,000 messages turned over to the agency by Clinton where classification markings appeared in the emails. However, he said those were mistakes where staff failed to remove the notations while preparing background and talking points for Clinton in a planned phone call with a foreign official."

And there's this.

"Kirby acknowledged that he could not say for sure whether "human error" accounted for all such instances of classification markings the FBI identified in Clinton's private email account because Comey said the FBI had recovered more such emails than the ones Clinton provided to State in December 2014.

"I can't speak to that," the State spokesman said. "We also don’t have full visibility on what the FBI — the documents that the FBI referred to yesterday. We don’t have full visibility on every document that they looked at as part of their investigation."


Read more: http://www.politico.com/blogs/under-the-radar/2016/07/hillary-clinton-classified-emails-error-225194#ixzz4EnmZ6LNW

In regards to the 52 email chains. Comey was quite clear that they weren't marked. Comey also said that the info was copied from other secure documents and systems. Hillary should have filled out spillage reports on those emails.


The emails are dead now other than campaign fodder and IMHO the way people feel about it now is how they will always feel.

[Bill USA]

8. "Comey was quite clear that they weren't marked" - I didn't know that. HE must have indicated this

. in the Congressional Committee hearing.("Yes"/"No"?)


"Comey also said that the info was copied from other secure documents and systems. Hillary should have filled out spillage reports on those emails."

Was Clinton knowledgeable or informed that "the info was copied from other secure documents and systems" .. or is this one of Comey's inferences - "that 'anybody' should have known" this was classfied.

as for the three ... It seems to me that Comey admitted none of the three had Classified Headers on them - which means they weren't marked classified.

I think many people (poll data) think she lied to Congress - that is, she did receive/send emails MARKED Classified. Since, this is flat wrong.. I am of the opinion that people should make every effort to make this known... oh and to criticize M$M (vigorously) for not clarifying this and therefor contributing to this impression.

I think M$M should be referred to as Public Relations arm of the GOP.

Whenever they say "Hillary's trust numbers" we should comment (on M$M sites) that statistic is actually the GOP-M$M Big Lie Quotient - indicating how successful the GOP and M$M have been in bamboozling the suckers.

[NWCorona]

10. Yes it was in the hearings

I can't answer that second question and that's the reason IMHO the perjury in Congress enquiry will go nowhere if the facts are as presented.

[Bill USA]

12. thanks 4 info. Here's Cummings' letter "Criminal Referral “Unwarranted” After Learning New Facts ..

Cummings to Chaffetz: Criminal Referral “Unwarranted” After Learning New Facts at Today’s Hearing With FBI Director
http://democrats.oversight.house.gov/news/press-releases/cummings-to-chaffetz-criminal-referral-unwarranted-after-learning-new-facts-at

[WhiteTara]

7. Thanks. Well written.

[LAS14]

9. Thank you for this analysis!!!

I've been trying to sort this out ever since Comey spoke.

[Bill USA]

11. Comey's statement as to the handling of Classified info (after stating the legal recommendation)

was a master class in disinformation. That's what I wanted to show.

His performance was disgusting, reprehensible and typically Republican.

All he should have said was what they recommended to Justice. All the other stuff was loaded with conjecture and extra-legal opinions. As somebody on this site said (a comment on one of my threads): "extremely careless" is NOT a legal term.... and he wanted to make it sound more legitimate with the word "evidence". Obvious and odious duplicity!

"there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information".. again "highly classified" --- right! with no headers indicating classified information was in there.

[font size="3"]How do you have 'evidence' of something that is entirely up to subjective interpretation? [/font]

by using the word "evidence" he makes it sound like he's on sound logical and legal ground in making that statement. It's simply a judgement call and a bad one.

the State Dept IG report said that use of private email accounts among high ranking state dept execs is rampant..

Also, Comey alleges that commercial email accounts are better than what Hillary did. COMPLETE BULLSHIT. Commercial email service providers have hundreds of people charged with protecting their systems from hackers and malware. In order to do their jobs they are able to examine any and all emails and attachements thereto on their system. Does Comey think these people have Government security clearances ???? NOBODY CAN SAY, WITH CONFIDENCE, THAT ANY CLASSIFIED DATA IN EMAILS HANDLED BY COMMERCIAL EMAIL PROVIDERS HAS NOT BEEN COMPROMISED. Hillary had set up, in effect, a satellite Government controlled server. IT was a safer system than using commercial email as did Powell and Condi Rice.

[pnwmom]

13. Right. Those emails contained info that Intelligence thought should be classified but other agencies

disagreed.

I read somewhere that if they indicted Hillary they'd have to indicted something like 300 other people too -- long time, professional government employees who were doing their jobs as they always had. All of those 52 emails came to Hillary over the unclassified system, sent by other government employees.