James Comey Clinton Email Congressional Testimony Thread

[moderatevoter]

So none of them were actually marked classified?

This is what Director Comey had to say about this in his presser on Tuesday.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[moderatevoter]

So, on Tuesday it was "110 emails in 52 email chains were in some category of classification". Now it's "Well, three emails were marked classified, but you wouldn't see that if you weren't looking for it." How are the two statements even consistent? Serious answers only please.

110 e-mails contained classified material (likely classified after-the-fact). 3 were marked classified somewhere at the time she received them.

I think.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[moderatevoter]

So, on Tuesday it was "110 emails in 52 email chains were in some category of classification". Now it's "Well, three emails were marked classified, but you wouldn't see that if you weren't looking for it." How are the two statements even consistent? Serious answers only please.

He's saying 110 contained classified information but in almost all cases the information wasn't marked classified. Classified documents and e-mails need to contain markings at the top that they contain classified information. Then each piece that is actually classified needs to be labeled as such individually in the document or e-mail. Apparently in 3 e-mails there were pieces that were marked classified but the entire e-mail did not have classified markings at the top. In the other 100+ cases, there was classified information but it was not marked in any way, probably because the person who typed it didn't it know it was considered classified by another agency. That's my understanding of the distinctions he's making.

This is what he said about classified information, even if it's not marked classified:

You must be logged in to read this quote.