She’s due for a coughing fit…
(NYPost) – On Tuesday, The Post’s Daniel Halper broke the news that Hillary Clinton continued recklessly mishandling classified information even after stepping down as secretary of state. The revelation is bracing — but hardly surprising.
We already knew Clinton’s email practices remained a national security vulnerability after she left the State Department at the end of President Obama’s first term.
The latest classified email disclosure is a joke. The document is so chockablock with classified information — meaning it is so thoroughly redacted — that the State Department might just as well have issued a blank page. This reminds us of how cynically the Democrats’ presidential nominee looked the American people in the eye and assured us, for over a year, that she never sent or received classified information.
When this preposterous claim was exploded, she tried Clintonian parsing: None of the emails, we were told, was “marked classified.” But the latest email discovery illustrates how farcical this talking point has always been.
Officials with security clearances know the categories of information that are classified pursuant to an executive order — whether they’re “marked” as such or not. Clinton not only knew the rules, she was in charge of enforcing them throughout her department.
And in any event, as FBI Director James Comey conceded, Clinton did send and receive some emails with classified markings.
We are also reminded that Clinton repeatedly vowed she’d surrendered every single government business-related email upon the State Department’s request.
This was an extraordinary lie: She hoarded and attempted to destroy thousands of emails which, like the one The Post describes, involved government business — some of it highly sensitive and significant (such as the 30 emails related to the Benghazi massacre that the FBI recovered but the State Department has yet to disclose). Converting government records to one’s own use and destroying them are serious crimes, even if no classified information is involved.
— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) October 10, 2016