Hillary Clinton's Server and Emails: What You Need to Know
One thing that needs to be emphasized given the slant of the stories
we are seeing and hearing today is that the hardware was turned over to
the Department of Justice, not to the House Select Committee on Benghazi. There is a big difference. It is not that she has finally turned over the server and flash drive,
as so many are saying (implying that she has relented to the demands of
Trey Gowdy & Co.). She has turned them over to DOJ in a most
timely fashion as and when asked, i.e. immediately. There is a difference between the GOP and the DOJ.
Hillary has
not given the hardware to Trey Gowdy (much to his consternation) or to
any elected officials. Republicans have been pursuing a political
agenda ever since those on the Select Committee relinquished their appointed task.
Preventing Hillary Clinton from assuming political office is, to them,
of far greater import and urgency than finding the security gaps that
need to be closed to prevent another Benghazi.
In simple language
that any fifth-grader should be able to understand, Jennifer Palmieri's
email answers pretty much every question you might have about the news
that has obsessed the media today.
You might hear some
news over the next few days about Hillary Clinton's emails. Because you
are an important part of this team, we wanted to take a few minutes to
talk through the facts -- we need your help to make sure they get out
there.
There's a lot of misinformation, so bear with us; the truth matters on this. Here are the basics:
Like other Secretaries of State who served before her, Hillary used a
personal email address, and the rules of the State Department permitted
it. She's already acknowledged that, in hindsight, it would have been
better just to use separate work and personal email accounts. No one
disputes that. The State Department's request:
Last year, as part of a review of its records, the State Department
asked the last four former Secretaries of State to provide any
work-related emails they had. Hillary was the only former Secretary of
State to provide any materials -- more than 30,000 emails. In fact, she
handed over too many -- the Department said it will be returning over
1,200 messages to her because, in their and the National Archives'
judgment, these messages were completely personal in nature. Hillary didn't send any classified materials over email:
Hillary only used her personal account for unclassified email. No
information in her emails was marked classified at the time she sent or
received them. She viewed classified materials in hard copy in her
office or via other secure means while traveling, not on email. What makes it complicated:
It's common for information previously considered unclassified to be
upgraded to classified before being publicly released. Some emails that
weren't secret at the time she sent or received them might be secret
now. And sometimes government agencies disagree about what should be
classified, so it isn't surprising that another agency might want to
conduct its own review, even though the State Department has repeatedly
confirmed that Hillary's emails contained no classified information at
the time she sent or received them. To be clear, there is absolutely no criminal inquiry into Hillary's email or email server.
Any and all reports to that effect have been widely debunked. Hillary
directed her team to provide her email server and a thumb drive in order
to cooperate with the review process and to ensure these materials were
stored in a safe and secure manner. What about the Benghazi committee? While
you may hear from the Republican-led Benghazi committee about Hillary's
emails, it is important to remember that the committee was formed to
focus on learning lessons from Benghazi to help prevent future tragedies
at our embassies and consulates around the globe. Instead, the
committee, led by Republican Representative Trey Gowdy, is spending
nearly $6 million in taxpayer money to conduct a partisan witch-hunt
designed to do political damage to Hillary in the run-up to the
election. Hillary has remained absolutely committed to cooperating.
That's why, just as she gave her email server to the government, she's
also testifying before the Benghazi committee in October and is actively
working with the Justice Department to make sure they have what they
need. She hopes that her emails will continue to be released in a timely
fashion. It's worth noting: Many of the
Republican candidates for president have done the same things for which
they're now criticizing Hillary. As governor, Jeb Bush owned his own
private server and his staff decided which emails he turned over as
work-related from his private account. Bobby Jindal went a step further,
using private email to communicate with his immediate staff but
refusing to release his work-related emails. Scott Walker and Rick Perry
had email issues themselves. The bottom line: Look,
this kind of nonsense comes with the territory of running for
president. We know it, Hillary knows it, and we expect it to continue
from now until Election Day.
It's okay. We'll be ready. We have
the facts, our principles, and you on our side. And it's vital that you
read and absorb the real story so that you know what to say the next
time you hear about this around the dinner table or the water cooler. Take a look at more details here, including a complete Q&A, and pass them along: https://www.hillaryclinton.com/email-facts/
Thanks,
Jennifer
Jennifer Palmieri
Communications Director
Hillary for America
Here is the Recommended Reading. I know a lot of people prefer the quick inoculation of a poster or video. I also know that serious Hillary loyalists take the time to read, study and prepare. It is a battle out there. Be armed with the facts!
We’ve put all of the information about Hillary Clinton’s State Department emails here. Just the facts, all in one place. Why did Clinton use her own email account?
When
Clinton got to the Department, she opted to use her personal email
account as a matter of convenience. It enabled her to reach people
quickly and keep in regular touch with her family and friends more
easily given her travel schedule.
That is the only reason she used her own account.
Her
usage was widely known to the over 100 State Department and U.S.
government colleagues she emailed, consistent with the practice of prior
Secretaries of State and permitted at the time. As Clinton has said,
in hindsight, it would have been better to just have two accounts.
While she thought using one account would be easier, obviously, that has
not been the case. Was it allowed?
Yes.
The laws, regulations, and State Department policy in place during her
tenure permitted her to use a non-government email for work.
The
2009 National Archives regulation in place during her tenure required
that "[a]gencies that allow employees to send and receive official
electronic mail messages using a system not operated by the agency must
ensure that Federal records sent or received on such systems are
preserved in the appropriate agency recordkeeping system." The
regulation recognizes the use of non-government email accounts.
As
she has stated, Clinton's practice was to email government officials on
their ".gov" accounts, so her work emails were immediately captured and
preserved. In fact, more than 90% of those emails should have already
been captured in the State Department’s email system before she provided
them with paper copies.
A Politifact analysis
also confirmed that Clinton's practices complied with laws and
regulations, including support from the former director of a prominent
government accountability organization: "In Clinton's defense, we should
note that it was only after Clinton left the State Department, that the
National Archives issued a recommendation that government employees
should avoid conducting official business on personal emails (though
they noted there might be extenuating circumstances such as an emergency
that require it). Additionally, in 2014, President Barack Obama signed
changes to the Federal Records Act that explicitly said federal
officials can only use personal email addresses if they also copy or
send the emails to their official account. Because these rules weren't
in effect when Clinton was in office, 'she was in compliance with the
laws and regulations at the time,' said Gary Bass, founder and former
director of OMB Watch, a government accountability organization." Clinton
said she did not use her email to send or receive classified
information, but the State Department and two Inspectors General said
some of these emails do contain classified information. Was her
statement inaccurate?
Clinton only used her account
for unclassified email. No information in Clinton's emails was marked
classified at the time she sent or received them.
When information is reviewed for public release, it is common for information previously unclassified to be upgraded to classified
if the State Department or another agency believes its public release
could cause potential harm to national security, law enforcement or
diplomatic relations.
After reviewing a sampling of the 55,000
pages of emails, the Inspectors General have proffered that a small
number of emails, which did not contain any classified markings and/or
dissemination controls, should have been classified at the time they
were sent. The State Department has said it disagrees with this
assessment.
Clinton hopes the State Department and the agencies
involved in the review process will sort out as quickly as possible
which of the 55,000 pages of emails are appropriate to share with the
public. How did Clinton receive and consume classified information?
The
Secretary's office was located in a secure area. Classified information
was viewed in hard copy by Clinton while in the office. While on
travel, the State Department had rigorous protocols for her and
traveling staff to receive and transmit information of all types.
A
separate, closed email system was used by the State Department for the
purpose of handling classified communications, which was designed to
prevent such information from being transmitted anywhere other than
within that system. Is Department of Justice conducting a criminal inquiry into Clinton’s email use?
No.
As the Department of Justice and Inspectors General made clear, the IGs
made a security referral. This was not criminal in nature as
misreported by some in the press. The Department of Justice is now
seeking assurances about the storage of materials related to Clinton’s
email account. Is it true that her email server and a thumb drive were recently turned over to the government? Why?
Again,
when information is reviewed for public release, it is common for
information previously unclassified to be upgraded to classified if the
State Department or another agency believes its public release could
cause potential harm to national security, law enforcement or diplomatic
relations.
Clinton hopes that State and the other agencies
involved in the review process will sort out as quickly as possible
which emails are appropriate to share with the public, and that the
release will be as timely and as transparent as possible.
When the
Department upgraded some of the previously unclassified email to
classified, her team worked with the State Department to ensure copies
of her emails were stored in a safe and secure manner. She also directed
her team to give her server that hosted her email account while she was
Secretary to the Department of Justice, as well as a thumb drive
containing copies of her emails that already had been provided to the
State Department. Clinton has pledged to cooperate with the government's
security inquiry. Would this issue not have arisen if she used a state.gov email address?
Even
if Clinton's emails had been on a government email address and
government device, these questions would be raised prior to public
release.
While the State Department's review of her 55,000 emails
brought the issue to the Inspectors Generals' attentions, the emails
that recently were upgraded to classified prior to public release were
on the unclassified .gov email system. They were not on the separate,
closed system used by State Department for handling classified
communications. Have Clinton's State Department aides
also been asked to provide the Department and Congress with emails from
their personal accounts?
We understand that members
of her State Department staff were recently asked to assist the
Department in its record-keeping by providing any work-related emails
they may have on personal accounts. They have received requests from
Rep. Gowdy as well.
Clinton is proud of the work of all the
dedicated public servants that were part of her team at the State
Department. She was proud of her aides then and is proud of them now, as
they have committed - as she has - to being as helpful as possible in
responding to requests. Press reports say she used multiple devices – a Blackberry and an iPad – is that true?
Clinton
relied on her Blackberry for emailing. This was easiest for her. When
the iPad came out in 2010, she was as curious as others and found it
great for shopping, browsing, and reading articles when she traveled.
She also had access to her email account on her iPad and sometimes used
it for that too. Was she ever provided guidance about her use of a non-".gov" email account?
The
State Department has and did provide guidance regarding the need to
preserve federal records. To address these requirements, it was her
practice to email government employees on their ".gov" email address.
That way, work emails would be immediately captured and preserved in
government record-keeping systems. What did Clinton provide to the State Department?
On December 5, 2014,
30,490 copies of work or potentially work-related emails sent and
received by Clinton from March 18, 2009, to February 1, 2013, were
provided to the State Department. This totaled roughly 55,000 pages.
More than 90% of her work or potentially work-related emails provided to
the Department were already in the State Department's record-keeping
system because those e-mails were sent to or received by "state.gov"
accounts.
Early in her term, Clinton continued using an
att.blackberry.net account that she had used during her Senate service.
Given her practice from the beginning of emailing State Department
officials on their state.gov accounts, her work-related emails during
these initial weeks would have been captured and preserved in the State
Department's record-keeping system. She, however, no longer had access
to these emails once she transitioned from this account. Why did the Select Committee announce that she used multiple email addresses during her tenure?
In fairness to the Committee, this was an honest misunderstanding.
Clinton used one email account during her tenure at State (with the
exception of her initial weeks in office while transitioning from an
email account she had previously used). In March 2013, a month after she
left the Department, Gawker published the email address she used while
Secretary, and so she had to change the address on her account.
At
the time the printed copies were provided to the Department in 2014,
because it was the same account, the new email address established after
she left office appeared on the printed copies as the sender, and not
the address she used as Secretary. In fact, this address on the account
did not exist until March 2013. This led to understandable confusion
that was cleared up directly with the Committee after its press
conference. Why didn't Clinton provide her emails to the State Department until December 2014?
In
2014, after recognizing potential gaps in its overall recordkeeping
system, the State Department asked for the help of the four previous
former Secretaries in meeting the State Department's obligations under
the Federal Records Act.
Clinton responded to this request by
providing the State Department with over 55,000 pages of emails. As it
was Clinton's practice to email U.S. government officials on their .gov
accounts, the overwhelming majority of these emails should have already
been preserved in the State Department’s email system.
In
providing these emails to the Department, Clinton included all she had
that were even potentially work-related—including emails about using a
fax machine or asking for iced tea during a meeting—erring on the side
of over-inclusion, as confirmed by the Department and National Archives'
determination that over 1250 emails were "personal" records (which they
have indicated will be returned to her).
After providing her work
and potentially work-related emails, she chose not to keep her
personal, non-work related emails, which by definition, are not federal
records and were not requested by the Department or anyone else. Why
did the State Department ask for assistance in collecting records? Why
did the State Department need assistance in further meeting its
requirements under the Federal Records Act?
The
State Department formally requested the assistance of the four previous
former Secretaries in a letter to their representatives dated October
28, 2014, to help in further meeting the Department’s requirements under
the Federal Records Act.
The letter stated that in September
2013, the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) issued new
guidance clarifying records management responsibilities regarding the
use of personal email accounts for government business.
While this
guidance was issued after all four former Secretaries had departed
office, the Department decided to ensure its records were as complete as
possible and sought copies of work emails sent or received by the
Secretaries on their own accounts. Why did Clinton decide not to keep her personal emails?
As
Clinton has said before, these were private, personal messages,
including emails about her daughter's wedding plans, her mother's
funeral services and condolence notes, as well as emails on family
vacations, yoga routines, and other items one would typically find in
their own email account, such as offers from retailers, spam, etc. Did Clinton delete any emails while facing a subpoena?
No.
As noted, the emails that Clinton chose not to keep were personal
emails—they were not federal records or even work-related—and therefore
were not subject to any preservation obligation under the Federal
Records Act or any request. Nor would they have been subject to the
subpoena—which did not exist at the time—that was issued by the Benghazi
Select Committee some three months later.
Rep. Gowdy's subpoena
issued in March 2015 did not seek, and had nothing to do with, her
personal, non-work emails nor her server nor the request by State
Department last year for her help in their own record-keeping. Indeed in
his March 19th letter, Rep. Gowdy expressly stated he was not seeking any emails that were "purely personal in nature."
In
March 2015, when Rep. Gowdy issued a subpoena to Clinton, the State
Department had received all of Clinton's work-related emails in response
to their 2014 request, and indeed, had already provided Clinton's
relevant emails to Rep. Gowdy’s committee.
Rep. Gowdy, other
Republicans, and some members of the media have seized on a CNN
interview with Clinton to question her on this point. Rep. Gowdy has
even gone so far as to say Clinton is lying. But he and the others are
clearly mistaken.
As Vox reported,
"[S]he didn't lie about the subpoena. … Clinton clearly wasn't
responding to the question of whether she'd ever been subpoenaed by the
Benghazi Committee but whether she'd been subpoenaed before she wiped
the emails from her server." Additionally, Factcheck.org said in its analysis,
"Clinton's denial came in response to a question about deleting emails
'while facing a subpoena,' and Clinton objected to Keilar's
'assumption.' Clinton’s campaign said that the emails were deleted
before she received the subpoena and that was the point Clinton was
making." Politifact added, "Suggesting that Clinton deleted emails while facing a subpoena contradicts what we know about the controversy so far."
Vox went on to further decry Rep. Gowdy's reaction, saying,
"[T]his one's a particularly absurd gimmick, even for a committee that
is selectively leaking from depositions and documents to justify its
existence. If there was a more extreme category of dissembling than
'pants on fire,' now would be the time for Politifact to roll it out on
the House Republicans." Why was the State Department given printed copies?
That
is the requirement. The instructions regarding electronic mail in the
Foreign Affairs Manual (the Department's policy manual) require that
"until technology allowing archival capabilities for long-term
electronic storage and retrieval of email messages is available and
installed, those messages warranting preservation as records (for
periods longer than current E-mail systems routinely maintain them) must
be printed out and filed with related records." [5 FAM 443.3]. Were any work items deleted in the course of producing the printed copies?
No. How many emails were in her account? And how many of those were provided to the State Department?
Her
email account contained a total of 62,320 sent and received emails from
March 2009 to February 2013. Based on the review process described
below, 30,490 of these emails were provided to the Department, and the
remaining 31,830 were private, personal records. How and who decided what should be provided to the State Department?
The
Federal Records Act puts the obligation on the government official to
determine what is and is not a federal record. The State Department
Foreign Affairs Manual outlines guidance "designed to help employees
determine which of their e-mail messages must be preserved as federal
records and which may be deleted without further authorization because
they are not Federal record materials." [5 FAM 443.1(c)].
Following
conversations with State Department officials and in response to the
State Department's 2014 letter to former Secretaries, Clinton directed
her attorneys to assist by identifying and preserving all emails that
could potentially be federal records. This entailed a multi-step process
to review each email and provide printed copies of Clinton's emails to
the State Department, erring on the side of including anything that
might be even potentially work-related.
A search was conducted on
Clinton's email account for all emails sent and received from 2009 to
her last day in office, February 1, 2013.
After this universe was
determined, a search was conducted for a ".gov" (not just state.gov) in
any address field in an email. This produced over 27,500 emails,
representing more than 90% of the 30,490 printed copies that were
provided to the State Department.
To help identify any potential
non-".gov" correspondence that should be included, a search of first and
last names of more than 100 State Department and other U.S. government
officials was performed. This included all Deputy Secretaries, Under
Secretaries, Assistant Secretaries, Ambassadors-at-Large, Special
Representatives and Envoys, members of the Secretary's Foreign Policy
Advisory Board, and other senior officials to the Secretary, including
close aides and staff.
Next, to account for non-obvious or
non-recognizable email addresses or misspellings or other
idiosyncrasies, the emails were sorted and reviewed both by sender and
recipient.
Lastly, a number of terms were specifically searched for, including: "Benghazi" and "Libya."
These
additional three steps yielded just over another 2,900 emails,
including emails from former Administration officials and long-time
friends that may not be deemed by the State Department to be federal
records. And hundreds of these emails actually had already been
forwarded onto the state.gov system and captured in real-time.
With
respect to materials that the Select Committee has requested, the State
Department has stated that just under 300 emails related to Libya were
provided by the State Department to the Select Committee in response to a
November 2014 letter, which contained a broader request for materials
than prior requests from the House Oversight and Government Reform
Committee.
Given Clinton's practice of emailing State Department
officials on their state.gov addresses, the State Department already
had, and had already provided, the Select Committee with emails from
Clinton in August 2014 – prior to requesting and receiving printed
copies of her emails.
The review process described above confirmed
Clinton's practice of emailing State Department officials on their .gov
address, with the vast majority of the printed copies of work-related
emails Clinton provided to the State Department simply duplicating what
was already captured in the State Department's record-keeping system in
real time. Did Clinton use this account to communicate with foreign officials?
During
her time at State, she communicated with foreign officials in person,
through correspondence, and by telephone. The review of all of her
emails revealed only one email with a foreign (UK) official. Did
she withhold any work emails? What about the 15 emails that Sid
Blumenthal provided to the Select Committee that she did not provide to
the State Department?
She provided the State
Department with all work and potentially work-related emails that she
had, including all of her correspondence with Sid Blumenthal. We
understand that Mr. Blumenthal had some emails that Clinton did not
have, and Clinton had some emails that Mr. Blumenthal did not have, but
it is important to note that none of those emails provide any new
insights on the attack on our facilities in Benghazi. Do
you think a third party should have been allowed to review what was
turned over to the State Department, as well as the remainder that was
not?
The Federal Records Act puts the obligation on
the government official, not the agency or a third party, to determine
what is and is not a federal record. The State Department Foreign
Affairs Manual outlines guidance "designed to help employees determine
which of their e-mail messages must be preserved as federal records and
which may be deleted without further authorization because they are not
Federal record materials." [5 FAM 443.1(c)].
Clinton responded to the State Department's request by providing approximately 55,000 pages
of her work and potentially work-related emails. She has also taken the
unprecedented step of asking that those emails be made public. In doing
so, she has sought to support the State Department's efforts, fulfill
her responsibility of record-keeping, and provide the chance for the
public to assess the work she and officials at the State Department did
during her tenure.
After her work-related emails were identified
and preserved, Clinton chose not to keep her private, personal emails
that were not federal records, including emails about her daughter's
wedding plans, her mother's funeral service, family vacations, etc.
Government
officials are granted the privacy of their personal, non-work related
emails, including personal emails on .gov accounts. Clinton exercised
her privilege to ensure the continued privacy of her personal, non-work
related emails. Can't she release the emails she provided to the State Department herself?
Because
the printed copies of work-related emails she provided to the State
Department include federal records of the Department, the Department
needs to review these emails before they can be made public. She called
for them to be made available as soon as possible, and is glad to see
the Department has begun releasing them. Some of the
emails released show Clinton emailed aides at times on their personal,
rather than .gov accounts. Was she trying to hide these communications?
As
Clinton has said before, it was her practice to email U.S. government
officials on their .gov accounts if it was work-related. This is
evidenced in the emails released so far. In reviewing her emails in
2014, there was a fraction of emails with work-related information sent
to U.S. government officials’ personal accounts, and those were provided
to the State Department. The overwhelming majority of her work-related
emails were to .gov accounts. Where was the server for her email located?
The server for her email was physically located on her property, which is protected by U.S. Secret Service. What level of encryption was employed? Who was the service provider?
The
security and integrity of her family's electronic communications was
taken seriously from the onset when it was first set up for President
Clinton's team. While the curiosity about the specifics of this set up
is understandable, given what people with ill intentions can do with
such information in this day and age, there are concerns about
broadcasting specific technical details about past and current
practices. Suffice it to say, robust protections were put in place and
additional upgrades and techniques employed over time as they became
available, including consulting and employing third party experts. Was the server ever hacked?
No, there is no evidence there was ever a breach. Was there ever an unauthorized intrusion into her email or did anyone else have access to it?
No. What was done after her email was exposed in February 2013 after the hacker known as "Guccifer" hacked Sid Blumenthal’s account?
While
this was not a breach of Clinton's account, because her email address
was exposed, steps were taken at that time to ensure the security and
integrity of her electronic communications, including changing her email
address. Was the State Department able to respond to
requests related to FOIA or Congressional requests before they received
printed copies of her work-related emails?
Yes. As
the Select Committee has said, the State Department provided the
Committee with relevant emails it already had on the state.gov system
before the State Department requested any printed copies from former
Secretaries, and four months before the State Department received the
printed copies.
For example, in the well-publicized hack of Sid Blumenthal's email account, a note he sent Clinton on September 12, 2012, was posted online.
At first blush, one might not think this exchange would be captured on
the state.gov system. But in fact, Clinton forwarded the email, that
very same day, onto the state.gov system. And the email was produced by
the State Department to the Select Committee, and acknowledged by the
Select Committee, in August 2014.
This example illustrates: 1)
when an email from a non-".gov" sender had some connection to work or
might add to the understanding of State Department officials, it was
Clinton’s practice to forward it to officials at their "state.gov"
address; and 2) the State Department was able to search and produce
Clinton’s emails when needed long before, and unrelated to, receiving
the printed copies as they were already captured on state.gov accounts.
Hillary
Clinton has complied with every reasonable request, is cooperating
fully, and has nothing to hide from her government, Trey Gowdy, or the
American people.
Democratic
presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton answers reporters
questions about Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump after
announcing her college affordability plan, Monday, Aug. 10, 2015, at the
high school in Exeter, N.H. (AP Photo/Jim Cole)