http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/01/tracking-the-clinton-controversies-from-whitewater-to-benghazi/396182/
There are at least 22
top-secret emails on Hillary Clinton’s private server. The question is how they
got there and when they became top secret.
That fact comes
from the State Department on Friday—the Obama administration’s first public
confirmation of classified material on the server. However, “these documents
were not marked classified at the time they were sent,” State Department
spokesman John Kirby said.
The mailer demon continues to
haunt Hillary Clinton’s campaign, even as the Iowa caucuses approach. The first
indications of the 22 top-secret emails came in recent reports from Fox
News, NBC
News, and Politico.
Charles McCullough, inspector general of the Intelligence Community, wrote in a
letter that the private
email server Clinton used to conduct business while secretary of state
contained information about “special access programs.” That label applies to a
subcategory of sensitive messages more restricted even than top secret. Kirby
said the 22 emails include data about the special access programs.
The State Department and the
Intelligence Community have previously tangled over a different pair of emails.
The IC argued that the emails were top secret both at the time they were sent
and in the present, while the State Department demurred. The dispute led to an
FBI investigation. The emails in question in this case are newly unearthed
messages, not ones that were previously under discussion.
Related Story
In addition, some of Clinton’s
emails—which the State Department is currently releasing in batches, per a
judge’s orders—have been found to include information that is now marked top
secret, but which depending on who you believe was not or possibly was top
secret at the time it was sent. Clinton and her aides have consistently
maintained that she did not send or receive classified information on the
account while secretary. (She says she used a separate system for viewing
classified material.) And so far, despite various reports and salvos from the
various parties involved, there hasn’t been any clear evidence to contradict
that. Yet there are many emails left, and there continue to be reports that
suggest there may be more damaging information yet to come—a sword of Damocles
hanging over the Clinton campaign, even as the candidate seeks to beat back a
strong challenge from Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders to win the Democratic
nomination.
In an additional twist of
irony, the “special access programs” involved appear
to be drone strikes, which the U.S. government officially maintains are
secret, even though the press reports on them frequently, and White House
officials have spoken about them on the record and privately to reporters.
Are you confused yet?
The emails have become a
classic Clinton scandal. Her use of a private email account became known during
the course of the Benghazi investigation. Thus far, the investigations have
found no wrongdoing on her part with respect to the 2012 attacks themselves,
but Clinton’s private-email use and concerns about whether she sent classified
information have become huge stories unto themselves. This is a pattern with
the Clinton family, which has been in the public spotlight since Bill Clinton’s
first run for office, in 1974: Something that appears potentially scandalous on
its face turns out to be innocuous, but an investigation into it reveals
different questionable behavior. The canonical case is Whitewater,
a failed real-estate investment Bill and Hillary Clinton made in 1978. While no
inquiry ever produced evidence of wrongdoing, investigations ultimately led to
President Clinton’s impeachment for perjury and obstruction of justice.
With Hillary Clinton leading
the field for the Democratic nomination for president, every Clinton
scandal—from Whitewater to the State Department emails—will be under the
microscope. (No other American politicians—even ones as corrupt as Richard
Nixon, or as hated by partisans as George W. Bush—have fostered the creation
of a permanent multimillion-dollar cottage industry devoted to attacking them.)
Keeping track of each controversy, where it came from, and how serious it is,
is no small task, so here’s a primer. We’ll update it as new information
emerges.
What? Setting aside the
question of the
Clintons’ private email server, what’s actually in the emails that Clinton did
turn over to State? While some of the emails related to Benghazi
have been released, there are plenty of others covered by public-records laws
that haven’t.
When? 2009-2013
How serious is it? Serious.
Initially, it seemed that the interest in the emails would stem from damaging
things that Clinton or other aides had said: cover-ups, misrepresentations, who
knows? But so far, other than some cringeworthy moments of sucking up and some
eye-rolly emails from contacts like Sidney
Blumenthal, the emails have been remarkably boring. The main focus now is
on classification. We know that some of the material in the emails is now
classified. The question is whether any of it, and how much of it, was
classified at the time it was sent. Clinton has said she didn’t knowingly send
or receive classified material on the account. The State Department and
Intelligence Community have disagreed about that. In addition, the Intelligence
Community’s inspector general wrote
in a January letter that Clinton’s server contained information marked
“special access program,” higher even than top secret. Some emails that Clinton
didn’t turn over have also since surfaced.
What? On September 11, 2012,
attackers overran a U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, killing Ambassador Chris
Stevens and three other Americans. Since then, Republicans have charged that
Hillary Clinton failed to adequately protect U.S. installations or that she
attempted to spin the attacks as spontaneous when she knew they were planned
terrorist operations. She testifies for the first time on October 22.
When? September 11,
2012-present
How serious is it? Benghazi
has gradually turned into a classic “it’s not the crime, it’s the coverup”
scenario. Only the fringes argue, at this point, that Clinton deliberately
withheld aid. A House committee continues to investigate the killings and
aftermath, but Clinton’s marathon
appearance before the committee in October was widely
considered a win for her. However, it was through the Benghazi
investigations that Hillary Clinton’s use
of a private email server became public—a controversy that remains potent.
What? Before becoming
Clinton’s chief of staff, Cheryl Mills worked for Clinton on an unpaid basis
for four month while also working for New York University, in which capacity
she negotiated on the school’s behalf with the government of Abu Dhabi, where
it was building a campus. In June 2012, Deputy Chief of Staff Huma Abedin’s status
at State changed to “special government employee,” allowing her to also
work for Teneo, a consulting firm run by Bill Clinton’s former right-hand man.
She also earned money from the Clinton Foundation and was paid directly by
Hillary Clinton.
Who? Both Cheryl Mills and
Huma Abedin are among Clinton’s longest-serving and closest aides. Abedin
remains involved in her campaign (and she’s also married to Anthony Weiner).
When? January 2009-February
2013
How serious is it? This is
arcane stuff, to be sure. There are questions about conflict of interest—such
as whether
Teneo clients might have benefited from special treatment by the State
Department while Abedin worked for both. To a great extent, this is just an
extension of the tangle of conflicts presented by the Clinton
Foundation and the many
overlapping roles of Bill and Hillary Clinton.
What? During
the course of the Benghazi
investigation, New York Times reporter Michael Schmidt learned Clinton had used
a personal email account while secretary of state. It turned out she had
also been using a private server, located at a house in New York. The result
was that Clinton and her staff decided which emails to turn over to the State
Department as public records and which to withhold; they say they then
destroyed the ones they had designated as personal.
When? 2009-2013, during
Clinton’s term as secretary.
Who? Hillary Clinton; Bill
Clinton; top aides including Huma
Abedin
How serious is it? It looks
more serious all the time. The rules governing use of personal emails are
murky, and Clinton aides insist she followed the rules. There’s no dispositive
evidence otherwise so far. The greater political problem for Clinton is it
raises questions about how she selected the emails she turned over and what was
in the ones she deleted. The FBI has reportedly
managed to recover some of the deleted correspondence. Could the server
have been hacked? Some of the emails she received on her personal account are marked
sensitive. Plus there’s a entirely different set of questions about Clinton’s
State Department emails. The FBI is investigating
the security of the server as well as the safety of a thumb drive belonging to
her lawyer that contains copies of her emails. And the AP reports
that the setup may have made the server vulnerable to hacking. Given the shabby
state of State Department cybersecurity, she might not have been any better
off using the official system.
What? A former journalist,
Blumenthal was a top aide in the second term of the Bill Clinton administration
and helped on messaging during the bad
old days. He served as an adviser to Hillary Clinton’s 2008 presidential
campaign, and when she took over the State Department, she sought to hire
Blumenthal. Obama aides, apparently still smarting over his role in attacks on
candidate Obama, refused the request, so Clinton just sought out his counsel
informally. At the same time, Blumenthal was drawing a check from the Clinton
Foundation.
When? 2009-2013
How serious is it? Some of the
damage is already done. Blumenthal was apparently the source of the idea that
the Benghazi
attacks were spontaneous, a notion that proved incorrect and provided a
political bludgeon against Clinton and Obama. He also advised the secretary on
a wide range of other issues, from Northern Ireland to China, and passed along
analysis from his son Max, a staunch critic of the Israeli government (and
conservative bête noire). But emails released so far show even Clinton’s top
foreign-policy guru, Jake Sullivan, rejecting Blumenthal’s analysis, raising
questions about her judgment in trusting him.
What? Since Bill Clinton left
the White House in 2001, both Clintons have made millions of dollars for giving
speeches.
When? 2001-present
Who? Hillary Clinton; Bill
Clinton; Chelsea Clinton
How serious is it? At one
time, this seemed like the most dangerous of the bunch, but it has since gone
dormant—which isn’t to say that it’s dead. For the couple, who left the White
House up to their ears in legal debt, lucrative speeches—mostly by the former
president—proved to be an effective way of rebuilding wealth. They have also
been an effective magnet for prying questions. Where did Bill, Hillary, and
Chelsea Clinton speak? How did they decide how much to charge? What did they say?
How did they decide which speeches would be given on behalf of the Clinton
Foundation, with fees going to the charity, and
[…]
No comments:
Post a Comment