Quote:
Originally Posted by spence
I believe the situation here was that State acquired information through a casual channel they didn't deem should be classified while another agency acquired the same information through a more sensitive channel that they did deem was classified.
But the info as sent to Clinton's server was not market Top Secret nor did the originator believe it was classified at the time. The DNI got involved to review the discrepancy...
|
OK, you're saying that as one agency got that data and classified it as above top secret, State got the same infor and classified it as "nothing to see here, show it to the world".
I think that's merely your opinion, and in a stunning coincidence, it is an opinion which clears her of any wrongdoing.
The IG report states clearly, that after the email was discovered on her server, State tried to re-classify another agency's intelligence. That request was rejected.
We will see.
"But the info as sent to Clinton's server was not market Top Secret nor did the originator believe it was classified at the time"
The IG report disputes your claim here. They say it was top secret (or higher) at the time it hit her server.
"nor did the originator believe it was classified at the time"
If it was classified as top secret by the agency that developed it, the originator doesn't get to make that call.
Threaded Mode