Intelligence review finds Hillary e-mails contain “highly classified information”

What difference does national security make?
What difference does national security make?

This is from the radically leftist New York Times.

It says:

A special intelligence review of two emails that Hillary Rodham Clinton received as secretary of state on her personal account — including one about North Korea’s nuclear weapons program — has endorsed a finding by the inspector general for the intelligence agencies that the emails contained highly classified information when Mrs. Clinton received them, senior intelligence officials said.

Mrs. Clinton’s presidential campaign and the State Department disputed the inspector general’s finding last month and questioned whether the emails had been overclassified by an arbitrary process. But the special review — by the Central Intelligence Agency and the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency — concluded that the emails were “Top Secret,” the highest classification of government intelligence, when they were sent to Mrs. Clinton in 2009 and 2011.

On Monday, the Clinton campaign disagreed with the conclusion of the intelligence review and noted that agencies within the government often have different views of what should be considered classified.

So it’s the Hillary Clinton campaign’s word versus the words of the inspector general and the national security agencies. Well, Hillary would never lie to us about setting up a private e-mail server so that her e-mails would not be stored by her employer, would she?

But wait, there’s news about this story. To be fair, it does strike me as suspicious that the person that she hired to run the secret private e-mail server is going to plead the fifth when he has to testify, just like Lois Lerner did.

Investors Business Daily explains:

The aide who set up Hillary Clinton’s email server will reportedly take the Fifth Amendment rather than testify before Congress. Obviously, what he knows will hurt her.

Bryan Pagliano was Clinton’s director of information technology during her failed 2008 presidential run. After she became secretary of state in 2009, he followed her there.

He’s now known as the tech specialist who set up and maintained the Clinton server. Naturally, he has vital information Congress needs as it continues its probe.

And just as naturally, he said he will invoke his Fifth Amendment right when called on to testify.

While that’s his constitutional right, we’d bet his testimony would be likelier to incriminate his former boss than him.

Oh. So, I guess that does kinda make it look like the inspector general and national security agencies might be telling the truth, and Hillary Clinton’s campaign not telling the truth. Unexpected!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s