C05981066/ED US. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981066 Date: 05/31/2016 ATTACHMENT INFO NON-RESPONSIVE Location: — C:\Mcleod Clinton\Clinton MM\Clinton Sent (21 of 176) From: . McLeod, Mary Sent: — Monday, August 24, 2015 12:34 PM Subject: — FW: Letters Attachment: 1 of 2 (Outgoing Letter_Sec Clinton_David Kendall. Preserve Information’ Responsiv..._Redacted.pdf) Comments: — Specified source file-was not found (9401) [REVIEW AUTHORITY: Paul Blackburn, Senior Reviewer, ATTACHMENT INFO UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981066 Date: 05/31/2016C05981291°IED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981291 Date: 05/31/2016 RELEASE IN FULL) Brent McLeod, Mary Sen Tuesday, March 3, 2015 12:53 AM Te Visek, Richard C Subject: __Re: Hillary Clinton’s Use of Private Email at State Department Raises FlagS Noted. From: Visek, Richard C Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 04:08 AM To: McLeod, Mary Subject: Fw: Hilary Clinton's Use of Private Email at State Department Raises FlagS co From: Gerlach, Alec ‘Sent: Monday, March 02, 2015 09:26 PM Eastern Standard Time ‘To: Bair, James P; Beechem, Stephanie; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; Cooper, Susannah E; Duval, Catherine S; Evers, Austin R; Fallon, Robert M; Frantz, Douglas; Frifield, Julia E; Harf, Marie E; Harris, Katherine A; Hickey, Lauren A; Kreikemeier, Chad; Leventhal, Brian H; MacDonald, Andrew T; Maier, Christina A; Sullivan, Thomas D; Vise, Richard C; Vadal, Pranay R: Lyons, Michele R ‘Subject: Hillary Clinton’s Use of Private Email at State Department Raises FlagS http:/redirect state, sbu/?uri=http:/Avww.nytimes,com/2015/03/03/us/politics/hillary-clintons- use-of-private-emairat-state-department-raises-flags.htmI? hp&action=click&patype=Homer lumn-region®ior News&WT nav=top-news& r=0. Hillary Clinton's Use of Private Email at State Department Raises FlagsBy MICHAEL S. SCHMIDTMARCH 2, 2015 WASHINGTON — Hillary Rodham Clinton exclusively used a personal email account to conduct government business as secretary of state, State Department officials said, and may have violated federal requirements that officals’ correspondence be retained as part of the agency's record. Mrs. Clinton did not have a government email address during her four-year tenure at the State Department. Her aides took no actions to have her personal emails preserved on department servers at the time, as required by the Federal Records Act twas only two months ago, in response to a new State Department effort to comply with federal record-keeping practices, that Mrs. Clinton's advisers reviewed tens of thousands of ages of her personal emails and decided which ones to tum over to the State Department. All told, 55,000 pages of emails were given to the department.Mrs. Clinton stepped down from the secretary's post in early 2013. Hillary Rodham Clinton in Indiana in 2008, Her economic message in that campaign resonated with white, working-class voters.Economic Plan Is a Quandary for Hillary Clinton's ‘CampaignFEB. 7, 2015Former Gov. Martin O'Malley of Maryland spoke at a conference hosted by the South Carolina Democratic Party in Myrtle Beach, S.C. on Saturday Martin O'Malley, in Veiled Jab at Hillary Clinton, Derides Politics of ‘Triangulation FEB. 28, 2015Jeb Bush at an event in Florida last week. When he was governor of Fiorida, he’ seemed to enjoy back-and-forths with familiar journalists via email.On the Record: Emails to Florida Reporters REVIEW AUTHORITY: Paul Blackburn, Senior R UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981291 Date: 05/31/2016C05981291IED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981291 Date: 05/31/2016 ‘Show a Jeb Bush Eager to EngageFEB. 19, 2015Fans watched a video of Senator Elizabeth Warren in lowa last month Hillary Clinton vs. Elizabeth Warren Could Delight Republicans JAN. 28, 2015Her expansive use of the private account was alarming to current and former National Archives and Records Administration officials and government watchdogs, who called it a serious breach “Itis very difficult to conceive of a scenario — short of nuclear winter — where an agency would be justified in allowing its cabinet-level-head officer to solely use a private email ‘communications channel for the conduct of government business," said Jason R. Baron, a lawyer at Drinker Biddle and Reath who is a former director of litigation at the National Archives and Records Administration. ‘spokesman for Mrs. Clinton, Nick Merril, defended her use of the personal email account and said she has been complying with the “letter and spirit of the rules.” Under federal law, however, letters and emails written and received by federal officials, such as the secretary of state, are considered government records and are supposed to be retained $0 that congressional committees, historians and members of the news media can find them. There are exceptions to the law for certain classified and sensitive materials. Mrs. Clinton is not the first government official — or first secretary of state — to use a personal email account on which to conduct official business. But her exclusive use of her private email, for all of her work, appears unusual, Mr. Baron said. ‘The use of private email accounts is supposed to be limited to emergencies, experts said, such as when an agency's computer server is not working, “I can recall no instance in my time at the: National Archives when a high-ranking official at an ‘executive branch agency solely used a personal email account for the transaction of government business,” said Mr. Baron, who worked at the agency from 2000 to 2013. Regulations from the National Archives and Records Administration at the time required any ‘emails sent o received from personal accounts be preserved as part of the agency's records, But Mrs. Clinton and her aides failed to do so. Itis not clear how many emails were in Mrs. Clinton’s account, and the process her advisers used to determine which ones related to her work at the State Department before tuning them over. Continue reading the main storyContinue reading the main storyContinue reading the main story'it's a shame it didn't take place automatically when she was secretary of state as it should have,’ said Thomas S. Blanton, the director of the National Security Archive, a group based at George Washington University that advocates government transparency. “Someone in the State Department deserves credit for taking the initiative to ask for the records back. ‘Most of the time it takes the threat of litigation and embarrassment." Mr. Blanton said high-level officials should operate as President Obama does, emailing from a secure goverment account, with every record preserved for historical purposes. “Personal emails are not secure,” he said. “Senior officials should not be using them." Penalties for not complying with federal record-keeping requirements are rare, because the National Archives has few enforcement abilities. Mr. Merrill, the spokesman for Mrs. Clinton, declined to detail why she chose to conduct State Department business from her personal account. Mr. Merrill said that because Mrs. Clinton was sending emails to other State Department officials at their government accounts she had “every expectation they would be retained." Mr. Merrill declined to answer questions about any emails that Mrs. Clinton may have sent to foreign leaders, people in the private sector, or government officials outside the State Department. The revelation about the private email account echoes longstanding criticisms directed at both the former secretary and her husband, former President Bill Clinton, for a lack of transparency and inclination toward secrecy. UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981291 Date: 05/31/2018C0598129151ED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981291 Date: 05/31/2016 ‘And others who, like Mrs. Clinton, are eyeing a candidacy for the White House are stressing a very different approach. Jeb Bush, who is seeking the Republican nomination for president, released a trove of emails in December from his eight years as governor of Florida Itis not clear whether Mrs. Clinton's private email account included encryption or other security measures, given the sensitivity of her diplomatic activity Mrs. Clinton's successor, Secretary of State John Kerry, has used a government email account since taking over the role, and his correspondence is being preserved contemporaneously as part of State Department records, according to his aides. Before the current regulations went into effect, Secretary of State Colin L. Powell, who served from 2001 to 2005, used personal email to communicate with American officials and ambassadors and foreign leaders. Last October, the State Department, as part of the effort to improve its record keeping, asked all previous secretaries of state dating back to Madeleine K. Albright to provide it with any records, like emails, from their time in office for preservation. “These steps include regularly archiving all of Secretary Kerry's emails to ensure that we are capturing all federal records,” said a department spokeswoman, Jen Psaki. ‘The existence of Mrs. Clinton's personal email account was discovered as a House committee investigating the attack on the American Consulate in Benghazi sought correspondence between Mrs. Clinton and her aides about the attack. Two weeks ago, Mrs. Clinton provided the committee with about 300 emails — amounting to roughly 900 pages — about the Benghazi attacks that Mrs. Clinton's aides had found among her personal emails. Mrs. Clinton and the committee declined to comment on the contents of the emails or whether they will be made public. The State Department, Ms. Psaki said, “has been proactively and consistently engaged in responding to the committee's many requests in a timely manner, providing more than 40,000 pages of documents, scheduling more than 20 transcribed interviews and participating in ‘several briefings and each of the committee's hearings.” Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone. From: Gerlach, Alec ‘Sent: Friday, February 20, 2015 11:31 AM To: Bair, James P; Beechem, Stephanie; Austin-Ferguson, Kathieen T; Cooper, Susannah E; Duval, Catherine S; Evers, Austin R; Fallon, Robert M; Frantz, Douglas; Frifeld, Julia E; Hart, Marie E; Harris, Katherine A; Hickey, ., Lauren A; Kreikemeier, Chad; Leventhal, Brian H; MacDonald, Andrew 7; Maier, Christina A; Sullivan, Thomas D; Visek, Richard C; Vaddi, Pranay R; Lyons, Michele R ‘Subject: JUDICIAL WATCH: U.S. MILITARY TIED BENGHAZI ATTACK TO AL-QAEDA ALLIED TERRORISTS JUDICIAL WATCH: U.S, MILITARY TIED BENGHAZI ATTACK TO AL-QAEDA ALLIED TERRORISTS ‘EDWIN MORAL Feb 2015 Washington, DEG WASHINGTON — The Obama administration was forced to release documents indicating that the U.S. military tied the 2012 Benghazi terrorist attack that killed a U.S. ambassador and three other Americans to an al-Qaeda allied group that promoted the establishment of an “Islamic state” in Libya. UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981291 Date: 05/31/2016CO5981291IED U.S. Department of State Case No, F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981291 Date: 05/31/2016 Government watchdog Judicial Watch (JW) obtained 486 pages from the Pentagon through a federal ‘court order in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit. “Almost all of the documents had been previously classified as secret, and the Defense Department has redacted a large percentage of the material in order to protect ‘military plans and operations,” ‘intelligence’ activities, and other exemptions,” notes JW, ‘The documents are just the latest confirmation that the Obama administration lied to the American people when officials claimed the September 11, 2012 attack against the U.S. consulate and other facilities in Benghazi, Libya was nothing more than the violent escalation of a protest by Muslims over a video, “It is extraordinary that we had to wait for over two years and had to force the release of documents that provide the first glimpse into the military response to the terrorist attack in Benghazi,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton, “There is no doubt that the military considered this to be terrorist attack tied toa group allied with al Qaeda.” “This lack of transparency is an insult to those in the military and other deployed U.S. government personnel whose morale has been decimated by the breach of trust caused by President Obama's ‘Benghazi lies and failures,” he later added. Echoing the contents of the documents obtained by the watchdog, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence found that jihadists affiliated with al Qaeda were among the Benghazi attackers. Although heavily redacted, the documents confirm that the U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM) drafted orders for a military response — Operation Jukebox Lotus — a'day after the terrorist attack, specifically “to protect vital naval and national assets.” Other documents suggest that hours after the attack, the Pentagon tied the September 2012 assault toa group secking to establish “an Islamic state” in Libya and who were intent on attacking U.S. interests in _ that country in retaliation for a drone strike against an al Qaeda leader. Top echelons of the Pentagon received intelligence briefing slides early on September 12, 2012 that tied an attack on the Benghazi consulate compound earlier that year to the al Qaeda allied group promoting the Islamic state in Libya. Furthermore, the trove of documents confirm that U.S. troops used a picture posted on Twitter to verify Ambassador Christopher Stevens's death ‘The Obama administration was very much aware of the terrorist threat in the region, according to the records obtained by JW and the Senate intelligence panel report on the attack. Senate investigators, under Democratic leadership, concluded that the attack was “preventable.” UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981291 Date: 06/31/2016C059812915IED US. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981291 Date: 05/31/2016 Obama administration officials failed to heed “ariple” warnings about the deteriorating situation in Libya, according to the Senate report. “The DIA (Defense Intelligence Agency] terrorism threat level for Libya is significant,” one email message obtained by JW says. “The DOS [Department of State}residential criminal threat level for Libya is high and the non-residential criminal threat level is high. The political violence threat level for Libya is critical.” ‘Senate investigators accuse the State Department, under Hilary Clinton, of making “grievous” mistakes, ‘The Obama administration failed to produce documents showing communications between the State Department and AFRICOM regarding military response to the attack, (On the evening of September 11, 2012, Islamic terrorists stormed the U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi, killing Ambassador Stevenson and U.S. Foreign Service Information Management Officer ‘Sean Smith ‘A few hours later, a second terrorist assault targeted a different compound near by, murdering CIA contractors Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty and wounding 10 others, ‘Trey Gowdy (R-SC) chairs the House Select Committee on Benghazi convened by Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) under pressure from conservatives. 194i This email is UNCLASSIFIED, UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No, F-2015-04846 Doc No. C05981291 Date: 05/31/2016C05981305/ED US. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04648 Doc No. C05981305 Date: 05/31/2016 RELEASE IN FULL] McLeod, Mary Friday, August 14, 2015 6:15 PM ‘Beechem, Stephanie ; Gerlach, Alec ; Hickey, Lauren A ; Stout, Jennifer P ; Kennedy, Patrick F ; Finer, Jonathan J ; Rubin, Joshua A ; Prosser, Sarah E ; Smith, Daniel B ‘; Higginbottom, Heather A ; Kirby, John ; Macmanus, Joseph E ; Duval, Catherine $ ; Hickey, Lauren A ; Evers, Austin R ; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T ; Toner, Mark C ; Visek, Richard C , Maier, Christina A Subject: Re: Politico’ State Dept. won't search Clinton server ‘This story is based on the faulty premise that the Department had the server at one point. We did not. Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone. From: Beechem, Stephanie Sent: Friday, August 14, 2015 5:17 PM Gerlach, Alec; Hickey, Lauren A; Stout, Jennifer P; McLeod, Mary; Kennedy, Patrick F; Finer, Jonathan 3; Rubin, Joshua A; Prosser, Sarah E; Smith, Daniel B; Higginbottom, Heather A; Kirby, John; Macmanus, Joseph E; ‘Duval, Catherine S; Hickey, Lauren A; Evers, Austin R; Austin-Ferguson, Kathieen T; Toner, Mark C; Visek, Richard C; Maier, Christina A ‘Subject: Poltico: State Dept. won't search Clinton server 1376.heml http://wwnw. politico com/story/2015/08/state-dept-wor State Dept. won't search Clinton server By ANNA PALMER 8/14/15 5:08 PM EOT ‘The State Department is not planning to search Hillary Clinton's email server as part of a Freedom of information ‘Act lawsuit brought by a conservative watchdog group, according to a court record fled Friday afternoon. ‘The State Department said it has made a good faith effort to respond to Judicial Watch's FOIA request for records about long-time Clinton aide Hura Abedin’s employment status. it says that itis no longer in possession of the server, which has been turned over to the Justice Department by Clinton's attorney. ‘The State Department also cited Clinton’s recent certification under penalty of perjury that the 55,000 documents she turned over are the only emails that “were or potentially were federal records” as the basis for why no further search was necessary. The State Department said that they have already done a search of the ‘emails in their possession and found no relevant documents. ‘The State Department's status update was ordered by U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia Judge Emmet Sullivan earlier this week. State Department lawyers also wrote in the status ot “currently working with DOJ, the FBI, or REVIEW AUTHORITY: Paul Blackburn, Senior Reviewer, UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04848 Doc No. C05981305 Date: 05/31/2016C05981305"IED US. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981305 Date: 05/31/2016 ‘other government agencies to search former Secretary Clinton's private email server for information responsive to plaintif’s FOIA request.” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton called the State Department's response as “woelully deficient, misleading, ‘and contemptuous of the court’s orders” and that the group will seek relief from the court. “Now we know that the Obama administration and Hillary Clinton have joined hands in this email scandal. The State Department relies on the half-baked, vague declaration by Hillary Clinton and a misleading letter by her lawyer to try to avold its obligations to produce records under the Freedom of Information Act,” Fitton said in a statement. "itis now clear that Mrs. Clinton is withholding servers and emails from the FB! and Justice Department, and Judge Sullivan is being misled to conclude otherwise.” This email is UNCLASSIFIED. UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981305 Date: 05/31/2016C05981020°IED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981020 Date: 05/31/2016 RELEASE IN PART BS McLeod, Mary Friday, August 14, 2015 4:44 PM Duval, Catherine $ ; Evers, Austin R FW: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! What do you think? sau This email is UNCLASSIFIED. From: Geriach, Alec ‘Sent: Friday, August 14, 2015 4:25 PM To: deBree, Mary |; Beechem, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; McLeod, Mary; Kennedy, Patrick F; Prosser, Sarah E; Fisher, Julie D; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Duval, Catherine S; Rubin, Joshua A; Evers, Austin R; Stout, Jennifer P; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T ‘Subject: RE: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! Please provide edits as soon as possible to the responses below - BS UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05961020 Date: 05/31/2016C05981020%IED US, Department of State Case No. F-2015-04848 Doc No. C05981020 Date: 05/31/2016 sBU - This emall is UNCLASSIFIED. From: deBree, Mary L m . Sent: Friday, August 14, 2015 2:11 PM To: Gerlach, Alec; Beechem, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; McLeod, Mary; Kennedy, Patrick F; Prosser, Sarah E fhe, ue; Macrans, Joseph E; Toner, Mark; Dual, Catherine S Eves, Austin R; AUS Ferguson, leen T ‘Ce: Rubin, Joshua A; Bieber, Wendy M; Stout, Jennifer P; Smith, Brenda 8; Cost, Lydia A; Helton-Floyd, Kathleen L ‘Subject: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! High UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05961020 Date: 05/31/2016 B5CO05981020°1ED US. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981020 Date: 05/31/2016 Jen would lke to have a meeting today at 3:00 in the $ Conference room re: FOLA. Please let me know if you will not be able to join for the meeting today. Thank you Mary . Morice ote sty Special Advisor : 202.647.5548 debreemi@state gow UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. 05981020 Date: 05/31/2016C059810225IED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981022 Date: 05/31/2016 McLeod, Mary RELEASE PANTO Sent: Monday, August 17, 2015 8:22 AM ° To: Rettig, Max L Subject: FW: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! This email ig UNCLASSIFIED. From: Gerlach, Alec Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 10:14 PM ‘To: Toner, Mark C; Kennedy, Patrick F; McLeod, Mary; Evers, Austin R; Finer, Jonathan 3; Hickey, Lauren A; Stout, Jennifer P; Fisher, Julie D; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Rubin, Joshua A; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; Kirby, John Cer Maier, Christina A ‘Subject: Re: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! Safe given to lawyer among irregularities seen in review of Hillary Clinton emails By John Salomon - The Washington Times - Updated:941 pm. on Sunday, August 18, 2015 When State Department officials first discovered that Hillary Rodham Clinton's personal email account contained classified information, they did net seize the thumb drive containing her digitally archived inbox but rather provided her attorney a special safe to secure the device, according to interviews and documents. The move allowed Mrs. Clinton's attorney to keep the device for several additional weeks while State officials reviewed paper copies of the emails for possible classified data. Officials were unconcerned that the thumb drive remained out of their possession because preservation orders from courts and Congress would ensure that her attomey would not destroy the evidence. The digital archive was turned over to the FBI for examination this month. ‘Throughout the review process, career State officials who normally handle the release of data under the Freedom of Information Act ran into disagreements with attorneys about which information in the emails was classified, The Washington Times has leamed. * REVIEW AUTHORITY: Paul Blackburn, Senior Reviewer UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05961022 Date: 05/31/2016j}CO5981022°IED U.S. Department of State Case No, F-2016-04848 Doc No. C05981022 Date: 05/31/2016 The disagreements are part of a complex, and at times tense, process in which career lawyers and career FOIA officials, along with a dozen intelligence review analysts from different agencies, are trying to identify and protect inteligence information contained in Mrs. Clinton's personal email account. State and FOIA lawyers normally work together on such requests, but this case has heightened tensions given Mrs. Clinton's status as the Democratic presidential front-runner. ‘The ongoing process has already flagged 60 of Mrs. Clinton's personal emails as containing classified information at the “confidential” or “secret” level, although a debate is raging over additional emails that the intelligence community and career State officials believe contain more sensitive top-secret data, officials confirmed. Amid the tensions, some career State employees have now alerted the intelligence community to irregularities that they fear may hide from the public the true extent of classified information that passed through her personal account, people familiar with the matter told The Times. Their concems include that one or more State Department attorneys involved in the production of the former secretary of state’s emails to Congress and a federal court have ties to Mrs. Clinton's private attorney's firm, creating at least the perception internally of a conflict of interest, sources told The Times, speaking only on the condition of anonymity ‘The complaints were received by Intelligence Community Inspector General |, Charles ‘McCullough III's office in recent weeks and have been referred to the State Department's chief watchdog, the sources said ‘The development opens up a potential new investigative front in a controversy that has already tarnished Mrs. Clinton's presidential bid. “At present, [the career officials] have not formally sought whistleblower status, but their disclosures are |ikely legally protected from retaliation since they involve matters affecting Congress, the courts and national security,” one of the sources directly familiar with the matter told The Times. ‘Since the revelation this spring that Mrs. Clinton had a private email server where she conducted some official business, the State Department has been busy reviewing some 30,000 ernails in that account for possible release to both the House Select Committee on Benghazi and a federal court handling a FOIA lawsuit, State officials told The Times that they are aware of tensions and disagreements during the extraordinary review process, and State Department inspector General Stephen Linick, the department's independent watchdog, is free to investigate any concems raised by employees. UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981022 Date: 05/31/2016C05981022IED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981022 Date: 05/31/2016 ‘They noted that Secretary of State John F. Kerry this spring, well before internal disputes arose, asked Mr. Linick to review the department's security standards that let Mrs. Clinton conduct official business on a private email account. “Secretary Kerry affirmatively asked for the State Department Inspector General to review the Department's records maintenance and FOIA processes and provide recommendations,” the departmentsaid in a statement to The Times. “As is customary, the IG's review is entirely independent, and they are free to speak to any Department employees in the course of their work.” Spokesmen for the State and intelligence Community inspectors-general declined to comment. Thumb drive not sought State officials acknowledged that one extraordinary step taken by the department's leadership occurred in May when reviewing officials identified the first pieces of classified information inside Mrs. Clinton's personal email. At the time, State officials had access to only paper copies of the emails but were aware that Mrs. Clinton's personal attorney, David Kendall, had an electronic copy of her email inbox in a pst format stored on a thumb drive. The .pst format is commonly used for email programs like Microsoft Outlook. Rather than seize the thumb drive and tum it over to the intelligence community, State provided a special secure safe capable of protecting classified information up to the "secret" level, officials confirmed to The Times. That arrangement allowed Mr. Kendallto hold on to the electronic archive for several more weeks until the ongoing review flagged at least two emails containing possible top-secret information, the most sensitive of the nation’s intelligence, officials acknowledged. ‘The most recent revelation about possible top-secret information finally prompted Mr. Kendall to turn over the thumb drive as well as the original email server's hard drive to the FBI in recent days. ‘State officials said they were not concerned about leaving the device with Mr. Kendall in the ‘safe they provided because they had paper copies of the emails, Mr. Kendall had a prior- issued security clearance and the emails were subject to court protective orders that they couldn't be destroyed. But career State and intelligence community officials found the arrangement with the safe to be highly unusual. UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981022 Date: 05/31/2016C05981022IED US. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981022 Date: 05/31/2016 ‘And it wasn't their only concem, Exemptions being changed Memos released by the State inspector general show Patrick Kennedy, undersecretary of state for management, has refused the intelligence community's request to keep Mrs. Clinton's stash of emails in a network for "top secret’ material. State officials counter that any top-secret ‘memes will be properly handled on the right equipment and with the right procedures. ‘On the campaign trail over the weekend, Mrs. Clinton seemed to mock the intelligence ‘community's concems over securing documents. She quipped that she now uses a popular social media outlet that makes messages disappear automatically. Career officials, meanwhile, ran into disagreements with lawyers from the department legal ‘counse''s office concerning which passages inside Mrs. Clinton's private emails should be declared classified in the FOIA lawsuit. The career employees told the intelligence community that some of the email passages they flagged to be exempted from FOIA release as classified were altered during the legal review process to other exemptions, such as “deliberative privilege,” according to sources familiar with the concems. , ‘The whistleblowers told the intelligence community that they feared the changes from “classified” to other exemptions were deliberate and might hide from the public the true extent of classified secrets that flowed through Mrs. Clinton's personal email account, sources said, State officials acknowledged to The that the multiple layers of review have resulted in different determinations about classification and occasional disagreements. State officials said the disagreements ran both ways between career lawyers and career FOIA officials. FOIA officials are concerned about issues related to their tasks, intelligence community ‘analysts are worried about protecting their respective agencies’ secrets, and the attorneys are worried about ensuring their representations to the courts are defensible, the officials said. “The IC is looking at this as needing to protect classified information. And the lawyers are looking at this as they have to defend to a judge why something was redacted from an email and kept from public release, especially if the FOIA case goes to appeal. Those are different responsibilities that create natural tensions,” one official familiar with the process said, State officials it may take weeks or months to resolve all the disputes, but the goal is to \ UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981022 Date: 05/31/201605981022 FIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981022 Date: 05/31/2016 reach consensus eventually between the intelligence community and State's various layers of review. From 6 to 60 Officials said the department ultimately isnt trying to hide the extent to which classified information passed through Mrs. Clinton’s private email account. They noted that while the media have focused on just a half-dozen of Mrs. Clinton's personal emails containing secret intelligence, State's own internal review has already flagged 60 emails through July 30 containing classified data. They expect that number to rise before all.30,000 emails are reviewed. Of those first 60, nearly all contained classified secrets at the lowest level of “confidential,” and one contained information at the intermediate level of “secret,” officials told The Times. State officials are working with Mr. McCullough’s office to review two emails his team has fiagged as containing "top-secret" information derived from possible Pentagon satelites, drones or intercepts, which is some of the nation’s most sensitive secrets. “Wherever the facts end up, that is where the determination will end," one official said. “The IGs have the independence to help us resolve these issues." ‘The debate about the higher-level classified data is complicated by what is known as dual- source information. Dual-source information involves situations in which the intelligence community reports information through classified channels at the same time open sources such as the news media disclose the same event. For instance, the Pentagon may report to State officials a drone strike killed a terrorist leader with the specifics of the location, the type of drone used and the intelligence that led to the strike, while news outlets may report the drone strike and death based on an announcement of a foreign government or terrorist organization. Officials are reviewing the circumstances around a handful of flagged emails to ensure no dual-source information was involved, the sources said, Meanwhile, some of what is fueling career officials’ concerns is the apparent background of the lawyers involved in the email reviews for both Congress and the courts. ‘The officials told the intelligence community that they believe one or more of those lawyers previously worked at the Williams & Connally firm where Mrs. Clinton's attorney, Mr. Kendall, is UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981022 Date: 05/31/2016C05981022FIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981022 Date: 05/31/2016 a senior partner. A check of public records identified at least one State Department attorney, Catherine “Kate" Duval, who previously worked at Williams & Connolly. A Politico profile identified Ms. Duval as having left Williams & Connolly to work for the Obama administration on the IRS targeting scandal before moving to State in the past year. Stale officials confirmed to The Times that Ms. Duval has'been working on Mrs. Clinton's. ‘emails but primarily in the capacity of helping to produce those that are relevant to the House ‘Special Committee on Benghazi. She is not part of the team of attorneys advising on legal matters involving the FOIA case. “Kate Duval is an exceptional professional and has the department's utmost confidence,” State ‘spokesman Alec Gerlach said Sunday night. The officials said privacy laws prevented them from identifying any other lawyers inside their department who might have worked for Williams & Connolly but that they were confident that none of the lawyers working on the email matter had any prior representation of Mrs. Clinton on personal matters before they joined State {As for conflicts of interests, just working in the same law firm previously as Mrs. Clinton’s attomey isn't a legal disqualifier, officials noted. “The department as complete confidence that its attorneys — who are almost exclusively career department lawyers — perform to the highest professional and ethical standards, including in connection with the review-and release of Secretary Clinton's emails,” Mr. Gerlach said. bttp://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/aug/16/hllary-clinton-emails-s ‘Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone. From: Gerlach, Alec ‘Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 8:56 PM ‘To: Toner, Mark C; Kennedy, Patrick F; McLeod, Mary; Evers, Austin R; Finer, Jonathan.J; Hickey, Lauren A; ‘Stout, Jennifer P; Fisher, Julie D; deBree, Mary L; Beecher, Stephanie; Prosser, Sarah €; Macmanus, Joseph E; Rubin, Joshua A; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; Kirby, John Ce: Maier, Christina A ‘Subject: Re: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! Story will post tonight. I'l keep an eye out Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone. UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04648 Doc No. C05981022 Date: 05/31/2016C05981022IED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No, C05981022 Date: 05/31/2016 From: Toner, Mark C Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 8:25 PM ‘ To: Kennedy, Patrick F; Gerlach, Alec; McLeod, Mary; Evers, Austin R; Finer, Jonathan J; Hickey, Lauren A; Stout, Jennifer P; Fisher, Julie D; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Rubin, Joshua A; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; Kirby, John Ce: Maier, Christina A Subject: RE: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! Thanks Alec - this looks good. This email is UNCLASSIFIED. Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 7:28 PM ‘To: Gerlach, Alec; McLeod, Mary; Evers, Austin R; Finer, Jonathan J; Hickey, Lauren A; Stout, Jennifer P; Fisher, Julie D; deBree, Mary L; Beecher, Stephanie; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Rubin, Joshua A; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; Kirby, John Ces Maier, Christina A ‘Subject: Re: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! Ok From: Gerlach, Alec Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 07:07 PM : To: McLeod, Mary; Kennedy, Patrick F; Evers, Austin R; Finer, Jonathan J; Hickey, Lauren A; Stout, Jennifer P; Fisher, Jule D; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Rubin, Joshua A; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; Kirby, John (Gc: Maier, Christina A ‘Subject: RE: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! sBU ‘This email is UNCLASSIFIED. : McLeod, Mary ‘Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 6:59 PM : To: Gerlach, Alec; Kennedy, Patrick F; Evers, Austin R; Finer, Jonathan J; Hickey, Lauren A; Stout, Jennifer P; Fisher, Julie D; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981022 Date: 05/31/2016C05981022/ED USS. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981022 Date: 05/31/2016 Rubin, Joshua A; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; Kirby, John (Ce: Maier, Christina A Subject: Re: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! BS Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone. From: Gerlach, Alec Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 6:52 PM To: Kennedy, Patrick F; Evers, Austin R; McLeod, Mary; Finer, Jonathan J; Hickey, Lauren A; Stout, Jennifer P; Fisher, Jule D; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Rubin, Joshua A; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; Kirby, John Ce: Maier, Christina & Subject: Meeting Today (Friday)! sBU ‘This email is UNCLASSIFIED. From: Kennedy, Patrick F ‘Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 6:22 PM To: Gerlach, Alec; Evers, Austin R; McLeod, Mary; Finer, Jonathan J; Hickey, Lauren A; Stout, Jennifer P; Fisher, Julie D; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Rubin, Joshua A; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; Kirby, John Ce: Maier, Christina A Subject: Re: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! Colleagues Regards Pat From: Gerlach, Alec Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 06:14 PM To: Kennedy, Patrick F; Evers, Austin R; McLeod, Mary; Finer, Jonathan J; Hickey, Lauren A; Stout, Jennifer P; Fisher, Julie D; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Rubin, Joshua A; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; Kirby, John (Ge: Maier, Christina A ‘Subject: RE: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981022 Date: 05/31/2016C05981022°IED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981022 Date: 05/31/2016 85 When State Department officials frst discovered that Hillary Rodham Ciinton’s personal email account contained classified information, they did not seize the thumb drive containing her digitally archived inbox but rather provided her attorney a special safe to secure the device, according to interviews and documents ‘The move allowed Mrs. Clinton's attomey to keep the device for several additional weeks while State officials reviewed paper copies of the emails for possible classified data. Eventually, the digital archive ‘was tured over to the FBI for examination this month, ‘And throughout the review process, career State officials who normally handle the release of data under the Freedom of Information Act ran into disagreements with lawyers about which information in the emails was classified, The Washington Times has leamed. ‘The disagreements are put of a complex, and at times tense, process in which career lawyers and career FOIA officials along with a dozen intelligence review analysts from different agencies are trying 0 identify and protect intelligence information contained in Mrs. Clinton's personel email account. ‘The ongoing process has already flagged 60 of Mrs. Clinton's personal emails as containing classifi information at the “confidential or ‘secret’ level, although there's a debate raging over additional emails the intelligence community and career State officials believe contains more sensitive top-secret data, officials confirmed. ‘Amid the tensions, some career State employees have now alerted the intelligence community to irregularities that they fear may be part of a political effort to hide from the public the true extent of Classified information that passed through her personal account, people familiar with the matter told The Times. ‘Their concems include that one or more State Department lawyers involved in the production of the former secretary of state's emails to Congress and a federal court have ties to Mrs. Clinton’s private lawyers firm, creating at least the perception intemally of a conflict of interest, sources told the Times, ‘speaking only on condition of anonymity. ‘The complaints were received by Intelligence Community inspector General |, Charles McCollough III's office in recent weeks, and have been referred to the State Department's chief watchdog, the sources said. 1 The development opens up a potential new investigative front in a controversy that has already tamished Mrs. Clinton's 2016 presidential bid “At present, they (the career officials) have not formally sought whistleblower status but their disclosures are likely legally protected from retaliation since they involve matters affecting Congress, the courts and national security,” one of the sources directly familiar with the matter told the Times. Since the revelation this spring that Mrs. Clinton had a private email server where she conducted some” official business, the State Department has been busy reviewing some 30,000 emails in that account UNCLASSIFIED U.S, Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981022 Date: 05/31/2016C05981022FIED US. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981022 Date: 05/31/2016 {or possible release to both the House Select Committee on Benghazi and a federal court handing a FOIA lawsuit State officials told the Times they are aware of tensions and disagreements during the extraordinary review process, and State Department Inspector General Stephen Linick, the department's independent watchdog, is free to investigate any concerns raised by employees. ‘They noted that Secretary of State John Kerry this spring, well before internal disputes arose, asked Mr. Linick to review the department's security standards that allowed Mrs. Clinton to conduct official business on a private email account. “Secretary Kerry affirmatively asked for the State Department inspector General to review the Department's records maintenance and FOIA processes and provide recommendations," the department said in a statement to the Times. "As is customary, the IG's review is entirely independent, and they are free to speak to any Department employees in the course of their work." ‘Spokesmen for the State and Intelligence Community inspectors general declined to comment. State officials acknowledged that one extraordinary step taken by the department's leadership ocourred in May when reviewing officials identified the first pieces of classified information inside Mrs. Clinton's personal email ‘At the time, State officials only had access to paper copies of the emails but were aware that Mrs. Clinton's personal attorney, David Kendall, had an electronic copy of her email inbox in a .pst format stored on a thumb drive. The .pst format is commonly used for email programs like Microsoft Outlook. Rather than seize the thumb drive and tum it over to the inteligence community, State yielded to concems about violating Mrs. Clinton's attorney-client privilege and instead provided a special secure safe capable of protecting classified information up to the "secret" level, officials confirmed to the Times. ‘That arrangement allowed Mr. Kendall to hold onto the electronic archive for several more weeks until the ongoing review flagged at least two emails containing possible top-secret information, the most ‘sensitive of the nation’s intelligence, officials acknowledged. ‘The most recent revelation about possible top-secret information finally prompted Mr. Kendall to turn ‘over the thumb drive as well as the original email server's hard drive to the FBI in recent days. State officials said they were not concemed about leaving the device with Mr. Kendall in the safe they provided because they already paper copies of the emails, Mr. Kendall had a prior-issued security Clearance and the emails were subject to court protective orders ensuring they couldn't be destroyed, But career State and intelligence community officials found the arrangement with the safe to be highly unusual. ‘And it wasn’t there only concern. Memos released by the State inspector general show Patrick Kennedy, Undersecretary of State for management, has ‘olvsed the intelligence community's request fo Keep her stash of emaiis in a network for “top secret” material. (On the campaign tall over the weekend, Mrs. Clinton seemed to mock the inteligence community's concems over securing documents, She quipped that she found a social media outiet that automatically made her messages diseppear Career officials meanwhile ran into disagreements with lawyers from the department's legal counsel's office conceming which passages inside Mrs. Clinton's private emails should be deciared classified in UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981022 Date: 05/81/2016C05981022'IED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981022 Date: 05/31/2016 the FOIA lawsuit. The career employees told the intelligence community some of the email passages they flagged to be exempted for release under FOIA as classified were altered during the legal review process to other ‘exemptions, such as “deliberative privilege,” according to sources familiar with the concems ‘The whistleblowers told the intelligence community they feared the changes were a deliberate effort to hhide from the public the true extent of classified secrets that flowed through Mrs. Clinton's personal ‘email account and that they risked misleading the judge in the court case, sources said, ‘State officials acknowledged to the Times that the multiple layers of review have resulted in different determinations about classification and occasional disagreements. State officials said the disagreements ran both ways between career lawyers and career FOIA officials. FOIA officials are concemed about issues related to their tasks, intelligence community analysts are worried about protecting their respective agency's secrets and the lawyers are worried about ensuring their representations to the courts are defensible, the officials said. “The IC is looking at this as needing to protect classified information. And the lawyers are looking at this 1s they have to defend to a judge why something was redacted from an email and kept from public release, especially i the FOIA case goes to appeal. Those are different responsibilities that create rratural tensions,” one official familiar with the process said. State officials said it may take weeks or months to resolve all the disputes, but the goal is to reach consensus eventually between the intelligence community and State's various layers of review. Officials said the department ultimately isn't trying to hide the extent to which classified information passed through Mrs. Clinton's private email account, They noted that while the media has focused on just a half dozen of Mrs. Clinton's personal emails containing secret intelligence, State's own internal review has already flagged 60 emails through July 30 containing classified data. And they expect that number to rise before all 30,000 emails are reviewed, Of those first 60, nearly all contained classified secrets at the lowest level of “confidential” and one contained information at the intermediate level of “secret,” officials told the Times. And State officials are working with Mr. McCullough’s office to review two emails his team flagged as containing “top-secret' information derived from possible Pentagon satellites, drones or intercepts, which is some of the nation's most sensitive secrets, "Where ever the facts end up, that is where the determination will end,” one official said. “The IGs have the independence to help us resolve these issues.” ‘The debate about the higher-level classified data is complicated by what is known as dual-source information, Dual-source information involves situations in which the intelligence community reports information through classified channels at the same time open sources like the news media disclose the same ‘event For instance, the Pentagon may report to State officials a drone strike killed a terrorist leader with the specifics of the location, the type of drone used and the intelligence that led to the strike while the news media may report the drone strike and death based on an announcement of a foreign government or terror organization, Officials currently are reviewing the circumstances around the top-secret revelations to ensure no dual- UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981022 Date: 05/31/2016C05981022/ED US. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981022 Date: 05/31/2016 -Souree information was involved, the sources said. Meanwhile, some of what is fueling career officials’ concems is the apparent background of the lawyers involved in the email reviews for both Congress and the courts. The officials told the intelligence ‘community they believe one or more of those lawyers previously worked at the Williams & Connolly law firm where Mrs. Clinton’s lawyer, Mr. Kendall, is @ senior partner. ‘A check of public records identified at least one State Department lawyer, Catherine "Kate" Duval, who previously worked at Williams & Connolly. A Politico profile identified Ms. Duval as having left Williams & Connolly to work for the Obama administration on the IRS targeting scandal before moving over to State in the last year. ‘State officials confirmed to the Times that Ms. Duval has been working on Mrs, Clinton's emails but primarily in the capacity of helping to produce those that are relevant to the House Special Committee ‘on Benghazi. She is not part of the team of attorneys who is advising on legal matters involving the FOIA case. ‘The officials said privacy laws prevented them from identifying any other lawyers inside their department who might previously have worked for Wiliams & Connolly but that they are confident none ‘of the lawyers working on the email matter had any prior representation of Mrs, Clinton on personal matters before they joined State. [As for conflicts of interests, just working in the same law frm previously as Mrs. Clinton's lawyer isnt a legal disqualifier, officials noted. In the meantime, with tensions rising in Washington over the Clinton email scandal, the question of whether the email production process involved political meddling or just differing bureaucratic responsibilities will fall for the time being on Mr. Linick, the State Department's internal watchdog, sBU This email is UNCLASSIFIED. From: Kennedy, Patrick F ‘Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 6:04 PM ‘To: Gerlach, Alec; Evers, Austin R; McLeod, Mary; Finer, Jonathan J; Hickey, Lauren A; Stout, Jennifer P; Fisher, Julie D; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Rubin, Joshua A; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; Kirby, John Ce: Maier, Christina A ‘Subject: Re: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! Colleagues BS UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981022 Date: 06/31/2016C059810227IED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981022 Date: 05/31/2016 To: Evers, Austin R; McLeod, Mary; Finer, Jonathan J; Kennedy, Patrick F; Hickey, Lauren A; Stout, Jennifer P; Fisher, Jule D; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Rubin, Joshua A; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; Kirby, John Ce: Maier, Christina A Subject: Re: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! Agree with this. Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone. From: Evers, Austin R ‘Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 5:30PM To: McLeod, Mary; Finer, Jonathan J; Kennedy, Patrick F; Hickey, Lauren A; Gerlach, Alec; Stout, Jennifer P; Fisher, Julie D; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Rubin, Joshua A; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T Ce: Maier, Christina A ‘Subject: RE: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! sau This email is UNCLASSIFIED. From: McLeod, Mary ‘Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 5:17 PM ‘To: Finer, Jonathan J; Evers, Austin R; Kennedy, Patrick F; Hickey, Lauren A; Gerlach, Alec; Stout, Jennifer P; Fisher, Julie D; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Rubin, Joshua A; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T Ge: Maier, Christina A . Subject: Re: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04846 Doc No. C05981022 Date: 05/34/2018 BSC059810225IED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No, C05981022 Date: 05/31/2016 Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone. From: Finer, Jonathan 2 ‘Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 5:14 PM To: Evers, Austin R; Kennedy, Patrick F; Hickey, Lauren A; Gerlach, Alec; Stout, Jennifer P; Fisher, Julie D; deBree, Mary L; Beecher, Stephanie; McLeod, Mary; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph €; Toner, Mark C; Rubin, Joshua A; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T Ce: Maier, Christina A ‘Subject: Re: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! From: Evers, Austin R ‘Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 05:07 PM To: Kennedy, Patrick F; Hickey, Lauren A; Finer, Jonathan J; Gerlach, Alec; Stout, Jennifer P; Fisher, Julie D; eBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; McLeod, Mary; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C Rubin, Joshua A; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T Ce: Maier, Christina A ‘Subject: RE: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! BU This email s UNCLASSIFIED. From: Kennedy, Patrick F Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 4:51 PM To: Hickey, Lauren A; Finer, Jonathan J; Gerlach, Alec; Stout, Jennifer P; Fisher, Julie D; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; McLeod, Mary; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Rubin, Joshua A; Evers, Austin R; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981022 Date: 05/31/2016 BSC05981022"IED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981022 Date: 05/31/2016 Ce: Maier, Christina A ‘Subject: RE: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! Colleagues Regards i pat From: Hickey, Lauren A Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 4:47 PM ‘To: Finer, Jonathan J; Gerlach, Alec; Kennedy, Patrick F; Stout, Jennifer P; Fisher, Julie D; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; McLeod, Mary; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark'C; Rubin, Joshua A; Evers, Austin R; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T ‘Ce: Maier, Christina A ‘Subject: RE: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! sau ‘This email is UNCLASSIFIED. From: Finer, Jonathan 3 ‘Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 4:11 PM ‘To: Hickey, Lauren A; Geriach, Alec; Kennedy, Patrick F; Stout, Jennifer P; Fisher, Julie D; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; McLeod, Mary; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Rubin, Joshue A; Evers, Austin R; Austin-Ferguson, Kathieen T Ce: Maier, Christina A . ‘Subject: Re: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! From: Hickey, Lauren A Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 03:58 PM UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05961022 Date:C05981022ZIED US. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981022 Date: 05/31/2016 ‘To: Gerlach, Alec; Kennedy, Patrick F; Stout, Jennifer P; Fisher, Julie D; deBree, Mary L; Beecher, Stephanie; McLeod, Mary; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph €; Toner, Mark C; Rubin, Joshua A; Evers, Austin R; Austin- Ferguson, Kathleen T; Finer, Jonathan 3 Ce: Maler, Christina A ‘Subject: RE: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! Lauren sBU This email is UNCLASSIFIED, From: Geriach, Alec ‘Sentt: Sunday, August 16, 2015 1:15 PM To: Kennedy, Patrick F; Stout, Jennifer P; Fisher, Julie 0; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; McLeod, Mary; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Rubin, Joshua A; Evers, Austin R; Austin- Ferguson, Kathleen T; Finer, Jonathan 3 Ce: Maier, Christina A ‘Subject: RE: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday) UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981022 Date: 05/31/2016C05981022FIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04846 Doc No. C05981022 Date: 05/31/2016 ] BS ‘seu ‘This email is UNCLASSIFIED. From: Kennedy, Patrick F Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 12:54 PM To: Gerlach, Alec; Stout, Jennifer P; Fisher, Jule D; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; McLeod, Mary; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Duval, Catherine S; Rubin, Joshua A; Evers, Austin R; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; Finer, Jonathan 3 (Ce: Maier, Christina A ‘Subject: Re: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! Colleagues UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981022 Date: 05/31/2016C05981022FIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C0S981022 Date: 05/31/2016 BS Regards Pat From: Gerlach, Alec Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 09:45 AM To: Stout, Jennifer P; Kennedy, Patrick F; Fisher, Julie D; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; McLeod, Mary; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Duval, Catherine S; Rubin, Joshua A Evers, Austin R; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; Finer, Jonathan 3 ‘Subject: Re: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! When State Department officials first discovered that Hillary Rodham Clinton's personal emé contained classified information, they did not seize the thumb drive containing her digitally inbox but rather provided a special safe that allowed her attorney to securely keep the materials from the intelligence community for several more weeks, according to interviews and documents. ‘And throughout the review process, career State officials who normally handle the release of data Under the Freedom of Information Act ran into opposition from lawyers who disagreed with some of their determinations that information in the emails was classified, The Washington Times has learned ‘The ongoing process has already flagged 60 of Mrs. Clinton's personal emails for containing classified information at the “confidential” or “secret” level, although there's a debate raging over additional emails the intelligence community and career workers believe contains more sensitive top-secret data, officials ‘confirmed. 5 ‘Amid the tensions, some career State employees have now alerted the intelligence community to irregularities that they fear may be part of a politcal effort to hide from the public the true extent of Classified information that passed through her personal account, people familiar with the matter told The Washington Times. ‘Their concems include that one or more State Department lawyers involved in the production of the former secretary of state's emails to Congress and a federal court have ties to Mrs. Clinton's private lawyer's firm, creating at least the perception intemally of a conflict of interest, sources told the Times, i ‘speaking only on condition of anonymity. ‘The complaints were received by Intelligence Community Inspector General |. Charles McCullough I's office in recent weeks, and have been referred to the State Department's chief watchdog, the sources UNCLASSIFIED U.S, Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981022 Date: 05/31/2016C05981022°IED US. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981022 Date: 05/31/2016 said. ‘The development opens up a potential new investigative front in a controversy that has already tamished Mrs. Clinton's 2016 presidential bid, “At present, they (the career officials) have not formally sought whistleblower status but their disclosures are likely legally protected from retaliation since they involve matters affecting Congress, the courts and national security,” one of the sources directly familiar with the matter told the Times. ‘Since the revelation this spring that Mrs. Clinton had a private email server where she conducted some official business, the State Department has been busy reviewing some 30,000 emails in that account fo pounbe release fo bot te House Select Commies on Benghts anc a federal court handing & FOIA lawsuit. State officials told the Times they are aware of tensions and disagreements during the extraordinary review process and are content to let State Inspector General Stephen Linick, the department's independent watchdog, take the lead in resolving them. ‘They noted that Secretary of State John Kerry this spring, well before internal disputes arose, asked ‘Mr. Linick to review the department's security standards that allowed Mrs. Clinton to conduct official business on a private email account “Secretary Kerry affirmatively asked for the State Department inspector General to review the Department's records maintenance and FOIA processes and provide recommendations,” the department said in a statement to the Times. “As is customary, the IG's review is entirely independent, and they are free to speak to any Department employees in the course of their work.” ‘State officials acknowiedged that one extraordinary step taken by the department's leadership occurred in May when reviewing officials identified the first pieces of classified information inside Mrs. Ciinton’s personal email ‘At the time, State officials only had access to paper copies of the emails:but were aware that Mrs. Clinton's personal attomey, David Kendall, had an electronic copy of her email inbox in @ .pst format stored on a thumb drive. The .pst format is commonly used for email programs like Microsoft Outlook. Rather than seize the thumb drive and turn it over to the intelligence community, State yielded to ‘concems about violating Mrs. Clinton's attorney-client privilege and instead provided a special secure safe capable of protecting classified information up to the "secret" level, officials confirmed to the Times. ‘That arrangement allowed Mr. Kendall to keep the electronic archive from the intelligence community for several more weeks until the ongoing review flagged at least two emails containing possible top- secret information, the most sensitive of the nation’s intelligence, officials acknowledged. The most recent revelation about possible top-secret information finally prompted Mr. Kendall to tum over the thumb drive as well as the original email server's hard drive to the FBI in recent days. ‘While career officials found the arrangement with the safe to be unusual, they also ran into ' disagreements with lawyers from the department's legal counsel's office conceming which passages inside Mrs. Clinton's private emails should be deciared classified in the FOIA lawsuit, ‘The career employees told the intelligence community some of the email passages they flagged to be ‘exempted for release under FOIA as classified were altered during the legal review process to other exemptions, such as "deliberative privilege,” according to sources familiar with the concems, UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981022 Date: 05/31/2016C05981022°IED US. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04846 Doc No. C05981022 Date: 05/31/2018 ‘The whistleblowers told the intelligence community they feared the changes were a deliberate effort to hide from the public the true extent of classified secrets that flowed through Mrs. Clinton's personal ‘email account and that they risked misleading the judge in the court case, sources said, ‘Sate officials acknowiedged tothe Times that the multiple layers of review have resulted in different determinations about classification, in part because lawyers are concemed about what is known in the inteligence wortd as “dual-source" information, Dual source information involves situations in which the intelligence community reports information through classified channels at the same time open sources like the news media disclose the same event. For instance, the Pentagon may report to State officials a drone strike killed a terrorist leader with the ‘specifics of the location, the type of drone used and the intelligence that led to the strike while the news ‘media may report the drone strike and death based on an announcement of a foreign government or terror organization, After FOIA officials first flag information in Mrs. Clinton's personal email as existing inside the nation’s classified intelligence system, the lawyers have tried to determine whether the information may also have come from public sources, officials explained to the Ties. Complicating the review process is the fact that some of the disputed emails in Mrs. Clinton's private inbox came from State officials who sent information via their official accounts, where classified information is supposed to be automatically flagged as such before itis sent or is blocked from being sent to external addresses because it includes national secrets, the officials said “The IC is looking at this as needing to protect classified information. And the lawyers are looking at this ‘as they have to defend to a judge why something was redacted from an email and kept from public release, especially if the FOIA case goes to appeal. Those are different responsibilities that create natural tensions," one official familiar with the process said. “IFIC flags a passage as classified and the lawyers later find that that information came through the official system unmarked (as classified) and there was public source information on the same subject, they are likely going to be reluctant to try to argue to a judge that the classification exemption applies,” the official explained. State officials said it may take weeks or months to resolve all the disputes but the goal is to reach ‘consensus eventually between the iteligence community and State's various layers of review. ‘The offcials said the department ultimately isn't trying to hide the extent to which classified information passed through Mrs. Clinton's private email account. They noted that while the media has focused on just a haif dozen of Mrs. Clinton's personal emails containing secret intelligence, State's own internal review has already flagged 60 emails through July 30 containing classified data, And they expect that number to rise before all 30,000 emails are reviewed. (Of those first 60, nearly all contained classified secrets at the lowest level of "confidential" and one Contained information at the intermediate level of “secret,” officials told the Times. And State officials are working with Mr. McCollough's office two review two emails his team flagged as containing “top- secret’ information derived from possible Pentagon satellites, drones of intercepts, which is some of the nation’s most sensitive secrets, “Where ever the facts end up, that is where the determination will end,” one official said, “The IGs have the independence to help us resolve these issues.” Meanwhile, some of what is fueling career officials’ concems is the apparent background of the lawyers UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981022 Date: 05/31/2016C05981022FIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No, C05981022 Date: 05/31/2016 involved in the email reviews for both Congress and the courts. The officials told the intelligence ‘community they believe one or more of those lawyers previously worked at the Williams & Connolly aw firm where Mrs, Clinton’s lawyer, Mr. Kendall, is a senior partner. ‘A-check of public records identified at least one State Department lawyer, Catherine “Kate” Duval, who previously worked at Williams & Connolly. A Politico profile identified Ms. Duval as having left Williams & Connolly to work for the Obama administration on the IRS targeting scandal before moving over to State in the last year. State officials confirmed to the Times that Ms, Duval has been working on Mrs. Clinton's emails but solely in the capacity of helping to produce those that are relevant to the House Special Committee on. Benghazi. She has no role in determining what should be exempted from FOIA documents as Classified, the officials stressed. ‘The officials said privacy laws prevented them from identifying any other lawyers inside their ‘department who might previously have worked for Williams & Connolly but that they are confident none of the lawyers working on the email matter had any role in prior representation of Mrs. Clinton on personal matters. In the meantime, with tensions rising in Washington over the Clinton email scandal, the question of Whether the email production process involved political funny business or just differing bureaucratic responsibilities wil fall for the time being on Mr. Linick, the State Department's internal watchdog, Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone. From: Stout, Jennifer P ‘Sent: Friday, August 14, 2015 8:43 PM To: Gerlach, Alec; Kennedy, Patrick F; Fisher, Julie D; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; McLeod, Mary; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Duval, Catherine S; Rubin, Joshua A; Evers, Austin R; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; Finer, Jonathan Subject: RE: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! ‘Thanks Alec, Lauren and Stephanie for the hard work on this today. From: Gerlach, Alec Sent: Friday, August 14, 2015 7:49 PM ‘Stout, Jennifer P; Kennedy, Patrick F; Fisher, Julle D; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; ‘McLeod, Mary; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Duval, Catherine S; Rubin, Joshua A; Evers, Austin R; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; Finer, Jonathan 3 ‘Subject: RE: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! ‘Thanks for quick responses today. I've sent along our response, and we'll keep you up to speed over the weekend as we hear back. ‘This email is UNCLASSIFIED. From: Stout, Jennifer P ‘Sent: Friday, August 14, 2015 7:07 PM To: Kennedy, Patrick F; Gerlach, Alec; Fisher, Julie D; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A McLeod, Mary; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Duval, Catherine S; Rubin, Joshua A; Evers, Austin R; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; Finer, Jonathan J UNCLASSIFIED U.S, Department of State Case No. F-2015-04846 Doc No. C05961022 Date: 05/31/2016C05981022/ED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981022 Date: 05/31/2016 ‘Subject: RE: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! Good here as well. Thank you. From: Kennedy, Patrick F Sent: Friday, August 14, 2015 6:53 PM To: Gertach, Alec; Fisher, JulleD; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; McLeod, Mary; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Duval, Catherine S; Rubin, Joshua A; Evers, Austin Rj Stout, Jennifer P; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T’ ‘Subject: RE: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! (Ok for Austin-Ferguson and Kennedy From: Gerlach, Alec ‘Sent: Friday, August 14, 2015 6:44 PM ‘To: Fisher, Julle D; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; McLeod, Mary; Kennedy, Patrick F; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph ; Toner, Mark C; Duval, Catherine S; Rubin, Joshua A; Evers, Austin R; ‘Stout, Jennifer P; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen ‘Subject: RE: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! | UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981022 Date: 05/31/2016 BSC05981022°IED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981022 Date: 05/31/2016 sBU This email is UNCLASSIFIED. From: Fisher, Julie D Sent: Friday, August 14, 2015 6:15 PM To: Gerlach, Alec; deBree, Mary L; Beecher, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; McLeod, Mary; Kennedy, Patrick F; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph €; Toner, Mark C; Duval, Catherine S; Rubin, Joshua A; Evers, Austin R; UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981022 Date: 05/31/2016 BSC05981022°IED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981022 Date: 05/31/2016 Stout, Jennifer P; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T Subject: RE: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! Clear for D-MR. From: Gerlach, Alec ‘Sent: Friday, August 14, 2015 4:25 PM ‘To: deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; McLeod, Mary; Kennedy, Patrick F; Prosser, Sarah E; Fisher, Julie D; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Duval, Catherine S; Rubin, Joshua A; Evers, Austin R; Stout, Jennifer P; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T ‘Subject: RE: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! Please provide edits as soon as possible to the responses below - UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981022 Date: 05/31/2016 BSC059810227IED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981022 Date: 05/31/2016 j eer rev[‘[{Y\v0oO—o) } BS seu | ‘This email is UNCLASSIFIED, From: deBree, Mary L Sent: Friday, August 14, 2015 2:11 PM To: Gerlach, Alec; Beechem, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; McLeod, Mary; Kennedy, Patrick F; Prosser, Sarah E; Fisher, Julle D; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Duval, Catherine S; Evers, Austin R; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T Ce: Rubin, Joshua A; Bieber, Wendy M; Stout, Jennifer P; Smith, Brenda B; Cost, Lydia A; Helton-Floyd, Kathleen L 5 Subject: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! Importance: High Hial Jen would like to have a meeting today at 3:00 in the $ Conference room re: FOIA. Please let me know if you will not be able to join for the meeting today. ‘Thank you. -Mary- Whore ote soy Special Advisor 202-647-5548 debreemi@state.gov UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04846 Doc No. C05981022 Date; 05/31/2016C059810231ED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981023 Date: 05/31/2016 . McLeod, Mary RELEASE IN PART B8 Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2015 2:01 PM. To: Marin, Julie B ; Dorosin, Joshua L Subject: FW: Can't walk today, but ‘sBU This email is UNCLASSIFIED. ‘Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2015 12:26 PM To: McLeod, Mary ‘Subject: RE: Can't walk today, but Too bad about walk. Catherive caterine Brown DAS Ter Policy & Coordination saint ‘s8u ‘This email is UNCLASSIFIED. From: McLeod, Mary ‘Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2015 11:24 AM To: Brown, Catherine W Subject: Can't walk today, but seu ‘This emall fs UNCLASSIFIED REVIEW AUTHORITY: UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. CO5981023 Date: 05/31/2016 BSC05981027°IED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981027 Date: 05/31/2016 From: McLeod, Mary RELEASE PART ES Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2015 12:37 PM ~~ — To: Prosser, Sarah E Subject: FW: For Review - Press Guidance for today Sarah—if you have any comments, pis feel free to send them. | don't have anything to suggest. Best, Mary ‘This email is UNCLASSIFIED. From: Finer, Jonathan J ‘Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2015 12:29 PM To: Kennedy, Patrick F; Gerlach, Alec; Hickey, Lauren A; Toner, Mark C; Higginbottom, Heather A; Stout, Jennifer P; Macmanus, Joseph E; Frifeld, Julia E; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; McLeod, Mary; Visek, Richard C; Ouval, Catherine S; Evers, Austin R; Kirby, John; Beechem, Stephanie; Fisher, Julie D; Prosser, Sarah E; Starr, Gregory B ‘Subject: RE: For Review - Press Guidance for today (One tweak and one question From: Kennedy, Patrick F Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2015 12:04 PM To: Gerlach, Alec; Hickey, Lauren A; Toner, Mark C; Finer, Jonathan J; Higginbottom, Heather A; Stout, Jennifer P; Macmanus, Joseph E; Frifeld, Julia E; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; McLeod, Mary; Visek, Richard C; Duval, Catherine S; Evers, Austin R; Kirby, John; Beechem, Stephanie; Fisher, Julie D; Prosser, Sarah E; Starr, Gregory 8 ‘Subject: RE: For Review - Press Guidance for today (Ok, as edited in once case below From: Gerlach, Alec ‘Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2015 12:00 PM To: Hickey, Lauren A; Toner, Mark C; Finer, Jonathan J; Higginbottom, Heather A; Stout, Jennifer P; Macmanus, Joseph E; Kennedy, Patrick F;Frifeld, Julia E; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; McLeod, Mary; Visek, Richard C; Duval, Catherine S; Evers, Austin R; Kirby, John; Beechem, Stephanie; Fisher, Julie D; Prosser, Sarah E; Starr, Gregory B ‘Subject: For Review - Press Guidance for today ‘The following responses are based on our conversation today. Please review as soon as possible. We need to brief Kirby ahead of the 2pm briefing, Thanks. il Blackburn, Senior Reviewer UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981027 Date: 05/31/2016C05981027IED US. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981027 Date: 05/31/2016 r es — . BS sBU ‘This email is UNCLASSIFIED, UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981027 Date: 05/31/2016C05981051FIED USS. Department of State Case No. F-201-04846 Doc No. CO5981051 Date: 05/31/2016 oC RELEASE IN PART 86) ‘AG/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=MCLEODM> Sent: ‘Wednesday, September 30, 2015 5:26 PM To: Prosser, Sarah E ; Visek, Richard C Subject: FW: FOR TODAY—-Guidance for DOJ for a hearing tomorrow BS s8u ‘This email is UNCLASSIFIED. From: Kennedy, Patrick F Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 4:09 PM ‘To: Prosser, Sarah E; Beechem, Stephanie; Evers, Austin R; Stout, Jennifer P; McLeod, Mary; Geridch, Alec; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; Visek, Richard C; Hickey, Lauren A; Snyder, Eric 3 Ce: Berlin, Lara N - ‘Subject: RE: FOR TODAY~Guidance for DOJ for a hearing tomorrow ok From: Prosser, Sarah E ‘Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 4:01 PM To: Beecher, Stephanie; Kennedy, Patrick F; Evers, Austin R; Stout, Jennifer P; McLeod, Mary; Gerlach, Alec; ‘Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; Visek, Richard C; Hickey, Lauren A; Snyder, Eric J Ce: Berlin, Lara N ‘Subject: FOR TODAY~Guidance for 00) for a hearing tomorrow all, REVIEW AUTHORITY: Paul Blackburn, Senior Reviewer UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981051 Date: 05/31/2016C0598105151ED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04648 Doc No. C05981051 Date: 05/31/2016 Thanks, Sarah UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05961051 Date: 05/31/2016 BSC05981051IED US. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981051 Date: 05/31/2016 Sarah Prosser Assistant Legal Adviser Office of the Legal Adviser "Management (L/M) US. Department of State ‘Washington, D.C. 202-687-2227 sBU ‘This email is UNCLASSIFIED. UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981051 Date: 05/31/2016C05981056IED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981056 Date: 05/31/2016 McLeod, Mary es ‘Thursday, August 20, 2015 7:22 PM Prosser, Sarah E Fw: Hey there Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone. From: Fisher, Julie D ‘Sent: Thursday, August 20, 2015 7:14 PM ‘Tor Kennedy, Patrick F; Prosser, Sarah E; Gerlach, Alec; McLeod, Mary; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; Beechem, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; Toner, Mark C; Finer, Jonathan J; Stout, Jennifer P; Duval, Catherine S; Evers, ‘Austin R; Macmanus, Joseph E; Higginbottom, Heather A Subject: RE: Hey there L_ From: Kennedy, Patrick F ‘Sent: Thurscay, August 20, 2015 6:20 PM To: Fisher, Julie D; Prosser, Sarah E; Gerlach, Alec; McLeod, Mary; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; Beechem, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; Toner, Mark C; Finer, Jonathan J; Stout, Jennifer P; Duval, Catherine S; Evers, Austin R; Macmanus, Joseph E; Higginbottom, Heather A ‘Subject: RE: Hey there Colleagues > . Regards pat From: Fisher, Julie D ‘Sent: Thursday, August 20, 2015 4:12 PM “Tos Prosser, Sarah E; Kennedy, Patrick F; Gerlach, Alec; McLeod, Mary; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; Beechem, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; Toner, Mark C; Finer, Jonathan 3; Stout, Jennifer P; Duval, Catherine S; Evers, Austin R; Macmanus, Joseph E; Higginbottom, Heather A ‘Subject: RE: Hey there (REVIE UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04848 Doc No. C05981056 Date: 05/31/2016 BSC05981056)FIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981056 Date: 05/31/2016 From: Prosser, Sarah E ‘Sent: Thursday, August 20, 2015 2:45 PM ‘To: Kennedy, Patrick F; Gerlach, Alec; McLeod, Mary; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; Beechem, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; Toner, Mark C; Finer, Jonathan J; Stout, Jennifer P; Duval, Catherine S; Evers, Austin R; Fisher, Julie D; Macmanus, Joseph E ‘Subject: RE: Hey there BS Best wishes, Sarah This email is UNCLASSIFIED. From: Kennedy, Patrick F Sent: Thursday, August 20, 2015 2:28 PM To: Geriach, Alec; McLeod, Mary; Prosser, Sarah E; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; Beechem, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; Toner, Mark C; Finer, Jonathan J; Stout, Jennifer P; Duval, Catherine S; Evers, Austin R; Fisher, Jule ; Macmanus, Joseph E ‘Subject: RE: Hey there Colleagues Sent: Thursday, August 20, 2015 2:26 PM To: McLeod, Mary; Prosser, Sarah E; Kennedy, Patrick F; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; Beechem, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; Toner, Mark C; Finer, Jonathan 3; Stout, Jennifer P; Duval, Catherine S; Evers, Austin R; Fisher, Julie D; Macmanus, Joseph E . ‘Subject: FW: Hey there UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981056 Date: 05/31/2016C059810561ED US. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04648 Doc No. C05981056 Date: 05/31/2016 BS seu This emai is UNCLASSIFIED. Rachael Bade (mato Sent: Thursday, August 20, 2015 1:54 °M To: Gerlach, Alec ‘Subject: Hey there Hey question. So, the names of the folks on those classified emails: 'm looking at them and wondering if peeps like Timmy Davis and William Roebuck, who sent the potentially classified emails, have their own lawyers? Just ‘an OTR question Bcf sod want to reachout. Does State rep them? Or do they have outside counsel? resi {ww foxnews.com/ polities interactive/2015/08/19/emails-from- WATBECACTION? _ Monday, August 24, 2015 12:34 PM Visek, Richard C Subject: FW: Letters Attach: Outgoing Letter_Sec Clinton_David Kendall Preserve Information Responsiv.... Redacted pdf, June 24 2015 letter to David Seide Redacted pdf From: This email is UNCLASSIFIED. B3 NATSECACT1947 Sent: Monday, August 24, 2015 12:24PM To: McLeod, Mary Subject: Letters Mary, Per our discussion. Thank you, From: Flynn-Brown, Josh (ludiciary-Rep) Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2015 5:26 PM To: Holden, Ryan D (O1G)' , (Ce: Foster, Jason (Judiciary-Rep) Ryan ~ Very Respectfully, bee REVIEW AUTHORITY: Paul BI UNCLASSIFIED U.S, Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981081 Date: 05/31/2016 BS0598107 9/FIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. CO5981079 Date: 05/31/2016 . McLeod, Mary FE IN FART 68) Sent: September 24, 2015 9:58 AM To: Prosser, Sarah E ; Visek, Richard C Subject FW: Review by 1AM - Post Story Guidance | ] BS L | sBU This email is UNCLASSIFIED. From: Gerlach, Alec ‘Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2015 9:51 AM To: Higginbottom, Heather A; Fisher, Julie D; Kennedy, Patrick F; Beechem, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; Toner, Mark C; Kirby, John; Stout, Jennifer P; Evers, Austin R; Snyder, Eric J; McLeod, Mary; Prosser, Sarah E; Frified, Julia E; Vaddi, Pranay R; Macmanus, Joseph & ‘Subject: Review by 11AM - Post Story Guidance REVIEW AUTHORITY: Paul Blackburn, Senior Reviewer UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2016-04646 Doc No, C05981079 Date: 05/31/2016C05981079IED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981079 Date: 05/31/2016 sBU ‘This email s UNCLASSIFIED, UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981079 Date: 05/31/20160598108 9FIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981089 Date: 05/31/2016 wri McLeod, Mary Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2015 1:47 PM To: Rettig, Max L Subject: FW: Sources: Review affirms Clinton server emails were top secret,’ despite department challenge ‘This email is UNCLASSIFIED. From: Gerlach, Alec ‘Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2015 1:46 PM To: Brown, Catherine W Cc: Smith, Daniel B; Beecher, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; Fisher, Julie D; Higginbottom, Heather A; Finer, Jonathan J; Stout, Jennifer P; Frifeld, Julia E; Schram, Zachary 1; Rubin, Joshua A; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen 7; Kennedy, Patrick F; Toner, Mark C; Kirby, John; Jacobs, Janice L; Del Corso, Christopher J; Trudeau, Elizabeth K; Snyder, Eric J; Evers, Austin R; Visek, Richard C; Prosser, Sarah E; McLeod, Mary; Bair, James P ‘Subject: Re: Sources: Review affirms Clinton server emails were ‘top secret,’ despite department challenge Got it. Thanks Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone. From: Brown, Catherine W Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2015 1:37 PM To: Geriach, Alec Ce: Smith, Daniel B; Beechem, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; Fisher, Jule D; Higginbottom, Heather A; Finer, Jonathan J; Stout, Jennifer P; Frifield, Julia E; Schram, Zachary 1; Rubin, Joshua A; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen Kennedy, Patrick F; Toner, Mark C; Kirby, John; Jacobs, Janice L; Del Corso, Christopher J; Trudeau, Elizabeth K; Snyder, Eric 3; Evers, Austin R; Visek, Richard C; Prosser, Sarah &; McLeod, Mary ‘Subject: RE: Sources: Review affirms Clinton server emails were ‘top secret,’ despite department challenge SSRI DAS or Poliy@ eeinon Sinao rion eat (REVIEW AUTHORITY: sBu This email is UNCLASSIFIED. UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981089 Date: 05/31/2016 BSCO5981089FIED US. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No, CO5981089 Date: 05/31/2016 From: Gerlach, Alec Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2015 1:32 PM To: Smith, Daniel B; Beechem, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; Fisher, Jule D; Higginbottom, Heather A; Finer, Jonathan J; Stout, Jennifer P; Fried, Julla E; Schram, Zachary T; Rubin, Joshua A; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; Kennedy, Patrick F; Toner, Mark C; Kirby, John; Jacobs, Janice L; Del Corso, Christopher J; Trudeau, Elizabeth K; ‘Snyder, Eric Evers, Austin R; Visek, Richard C; Prosser, Sarah E; McLeod, Mary; Brown, Catherine W BU This email s UNCLASSIFIED. From: Smith, Daniel B Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2015 1:30 PM To: Geriach, Alec; Beechem, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; Fisher, Julie D; Higginbottom, Heather A; Finer, Jonathan 3; Stout, Jennifer P; Fifield, Julia E; Schram, Zachary 1; Rubin, Joshua A; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; Kennedy, Patrick F; Toner, Mark C; Kirby, John; Jacobs, Janice L; Del Corso, Christopher J; Trudeau, Eizabeth K; Snyder, Eric J; Evers, Austin R; Visek, Richard C; Prosser, Sarah E} McLeod, Mary; Brown, Catherine W ‘Subject: RE: Sources: Review affirms Clinton server emails were top secret,’ despite department challenge UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981089 Date: 05/31/2016C05981089IED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04648 Doc No. C05981089 Date: 05/31/2016 This email is UNCLASSIFIED. From: Gerlach, Alec Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2015 1:27 PM ‘To: Smith, anie! B; Beechem, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; Fisher, Julie D; Higginbottom, Heather A; Finer, Jonathan J; Stout, Jennifer P; Frifield, Julia E; Schram, Zachary I; Rubin, Joshua A; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; Kennedy, Patrick F; Toner, Mark C; Kirby, John; Jacobs, Janice L; Del Corso, Christopher J; Trudeau, Elizabeth K; ‘Snyder, Eric 3; Evers, Austin R; Visek, Richard C; Prosser, Sarah E; McLeod, Mary; Brown, Catherine W ‘Subject: RE: Sources: Review affirms Clinton server emails were ‘top secret,’ despite department challenge This email s UNCLASSIFIED, Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2015 1:22 PM To: Gerlach, Alec; Beechem, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; Fisher, Julie D; Higginbottom, Heather A; Finer, Jonathan J; Stout, Jennifer P; Fifield, Julia E; Schram, Zachary I; Rubin, Joshua A; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; Kennedy, Patrick F; Toner, Mark C; Kirby, John; Jacobs, Janice L; Del Corso, Christopher J; Trudeau, Elizabeth K; Snyder, Eric 3; Evers, Austin R; Visek, Richard C; Prosser, Sarah'E; McLeod, Mary; Brown, Catherine W ‘Subject: RE: Sources: Review affirms Clinton server emails were ‘top secret,’ despite department challenge ‘BU This email is UNCLASSIFIED. From: Gerlach, Alec Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2015 1:09 PM To: Beechem, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; Fisher, Julie D; Higginbottom, Heather A; Finer, Jonathan J; Stout, Jennifer P; Frifield, Julia E; Schram, Zachary 1; Rubin, Joshua A; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; Kennedy, Patrick F; Toner, Mark C; Kirby, John; Jacobs, Janice L; Del Corso, Christopher J; Trudeau, Eizabeth K; Snyder, Eric J; Evers, Austin R; Visek, Richard C; Prosser, Sarah E; McLeod, Mary; Smith, Daniel B; Brown, Catherine W ‘Subject: RE: Sources: Review affirms Clinton server emails were top secret,’ despite department challenge UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981089 Date: 05/31/2016C05981089IED US. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04648 Doc No, C05981089 Date: 05/31/2016 sBU This email is UNCLASSIFIED. From: Gerlach, Alec Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2015 11:25 AM ‘To: Beechem, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; Fisher, Julie D; Higginbottom, Heather &; Finer, Jonathan J; Stout, Jennifer P; Frifield, Julia E; Schram, Zachary T; Rubin, Joshua A; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; Kennedy, Patrick F; Toner, Mark C; Kirby, John; Jacobs, Janice L; Del Corso, Christopher J; Trudeau, Elizabeth K; Snyder, Eric 3; Evers, Austin R; Visek, Richard C; Prosser, Sarah E; McLeod, Mary; Smith, Daniel B; Brown, Catherine W ‘Subject: Fox: Sources: Review affirms Clinton server emails were ‘top secret,’ despite department challenge http://www. foxnews.com/politics/2015/12/15/sources-review-affirms-clinton-server-emails-were-top-secret= despite-department-challenge.htm) Sources: Review affirms Clinton server emails were 'top secret,’ despite department challenge By Catherine Herridge, Pamela Browne Published December 15, 2015 FoxNews.com UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981089 Date: 05/31/2016 BSC05981089°IED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981089 Date: 05/31/2016 EXCLUSIVE: An intelligence community review has re-affirmed that two classified emails were indeed “top secret” when they hit Hillary Clinton’s unsecured personal server despite a challenge to that designation by the State Department, according to two sources familiar with the review. ‘The sources described the dispute over whether the two emails were classified atthe highest level as matter.” settled ‘The agencies that owned and originated that intelligence the CIA and National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency or NGA~ reviewed the emails to determine how they should be properly stored, as the State Department took Issue with their highly classified nature. The subject matter of the messages is widely reported to be the movement of North Korean missiles and a drone strike. A top secret designation requires the highest level of security, and can include the use of an approved safe. The sources, who were not authorized to speak on the record, told Fox News that while the emails were indeed “top secret” when they hit Clinton's server, one of them remains “top secret” to this day ~ and must be handled at the highest security level. The second email is still considered classified but at the lower “secret” level because more information is publicly available about the event. ‘The findings have been transmitted to the State Department, which continues to challenge the intelligence community's conclusions about the classification of all the emails. But the department has no authority to ‘change the classification since it did not originate the information. Earlier this month, Politico reported that the intelligence community was retreating from the “top secret” classification, a development that could have helped Clinton's presidential campaign deflect allegations about ‘mishandling classified material. Fox News can confirm itis true the handling of one email has changed since it ‘was drafted and sent, but this change has no bearing on the “top secret” nature of the emails when first received on Clinton's server. And this is what matters to the F5! probe. While the classification finding is important, the central issue is whether the FBI investigation concludes there was or was not a criminal violation. Fox News reported earlier this month that two top Republican senators have written directly to Secretary of State John Kerry and Director of National Intelligence James Clapper about possible leaks from their departments on their review of Clinton’s emails ~ wrongly leaving the impression that the two “top secret” messages were not that sensitive. ‘The letter was sent by Republican Sen, Bob Corker, who chairs the Foreign Relations Committee, and Sen. Richard Burr, who heads the powerful Intelligence Committee, on Nov. 13, with copies sent three days later to the inteligence community and State Department watchdogs known as inspectors general. The IGs were asked ‘to conduct an independent review of the process. While the senators’ letter is not public, Fox News has confirmed that the senators cited the Politico report from \Nov. 6 where unnamed sources claimed the two “top secret” emails had been downgraded after a second review. While hailed by Clinton's supporters as evidence she did not break the law and send classified information on her personal email account, the Politico story was later updated to reflect the fact that Clapper’s office said the review was ongoing. UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No, C05981089 Date: 05/31/2016C05981089/ED US. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981089 Date: 05/31/2016 This email is UNCLASSIFIED. UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. CO5981089 Date: 05/31/2016ICO5981097IED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981097 Date: 05/31/2016 [RELEASE IN PART 85,86) ‘McLeod, Mary Sent: Saturday, September 26, 2015 12:40 PM To: Gerlach, Alec ; Hickey, Lauren A ; Beechem, Stephanie ; Stout, Jennifer P ; Rettig, Max L Fw: String of Emails Raises Questions About When Hillary Clinton Began Using, Personal Account - NYTimes.com SBU Sex below. - | = - | en [Best Mary BS K Wom ny BlackBeny 10 smarphone . Original Message From McLcod, Mary go> 51229 PM. a B6 Le Seach Ae ‘Subjoct Re: Sting of Emails Raises Questions About Whea Hillary Clinton Began Using Personal Account - NYTimes.com, BS | = | | wuld be happy to speak with you if that would be help Best, Mary Sent from my BlackBemry 10 smartphone, Original Messaze on From Sent: Saturday, September 26, 2015 12:10 PM ‘To: McLeod. Mary — — — 4, Be ‘Subject: Fw String of Emails Raises Questions About When Hillay Clinton Began Using Personal Ac Mary — UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981097 Date: 05/31/2016C05981097IED US. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No, C05981097 Date: 05/31/2016 Department of Defense String of Emails Raises Questions About When Hillary Clinton Began Using Personal Account {[Caution-satic nyt comimages/2015/09/26/us26emals_ webl/26emails_web1-aniclelarge pe] WASHINGTON 777 A string of emails that has been provided to the State Department raises new questions about whether Hillary Rodham Clinton 77? ‘hdr22@clinvonemalcom 2? that she relied on forthe rest of her time in office, But on Friday, State Department officials said they had been given copies of an email chain between Mrs. Clinton and David H. Petraeus, the commander of United States Central Command at the time, that shows that Mrs. Clinton was using the ‘hdr22@clintonemail com- account by Jan. 28, 2009. ‘The chain, with emails from Jan, 10, 2009, to Feb. 1, 2009, was provided to the State Department by its inspector general and by the Defense Departmen, according to State Department officals. Mas. Clinton has said publicly and in a cour filing under oath that she gave the State Department last year al of the 30,000 ‘work-related emails in her possession. Itis not clear why she never provided the newly discovered email chain tothe State Department or why she said she did not begin using the hdr22@@clintonemail.com-hitp/edirec state sbu/? sufemaille:hd22@clintonemail.com>> account until two months after she took office. ‘A spokesman for ber presidential campaign declined to comment, ‘Six months after it was revealed that Mrs. Clinton relied exclusively on personal email account when she was secretary of state, the issue contimies to cause distractions for her campaign. In polls, voles have questioned her trustworthiness, and in Towa and New Hampshire she trails Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont in the race for the Democratic nomination. ‘Mrs. Clinton first addressed in March the issue of when she began using the account. On the same day that she held a news ‘conference atthe United Nations to address the account, her office released a nine-page document that said that '?before ‘March 18, 2009, Secretary Clinton continued using the email account she had used during her Senate service.7?? It added that 7?2she, however, no longer had access to these emails once she transitioned??? to using ‘hds22@clintonemail.com, Ina statement filed under oath in federal court in August, Mrs. Clinton said she had given the State Department all of the work-related emails on the personal account. 7771 have directed tht all my emails on clintonemail.com in my custody that were or potentially were federal records be provided tothe Department of State, and on information and belief, this has ‘been done,?7? Mrs, Clinton sai in the fling But the State Department had sai in June that all or part of 1 work-related emails sent or received by Mrs. Clinton were not ‘among the emails she gave to the department last year. . ‘The State Department also said on Friday that it had informed the House committe investigating the 2012 attacks in ‘Benghazi, Libya, that it would give the panol 925 emails about Libya that Mrs. Clinton sent or received from January 2011 t0 December 2012. In February, the department gave the pane! 296 emails related tothe attacks, UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981097 Date: 06/31/2016 BeC05981097IED US. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981097 Date: 05/31/2016 ‘TerThe State Department has previously informed both the committe andthe public that we ad not provided all materials relating to Libya, 77? the State Department said ina statement. 777The department instead focused on providing the Benghazi commit frst with the 296 emails that directly pertained tothe 2012 attacks in Benghazi. The documents provided tday do ‘not alter the fundamental facts known about the Benghazi attacks. 77? ‘Some Republicans perceived the production ofthe emails as an effort by Eric Syder, a former Justice Department counter- {erorism prosecutor, who is now in charge ofthe State Department??2s effors to tum over documents to the committe, to establish a better relationship with the pane. Republicans had criticized Mr. Snyder???s predecessor, Catherine Duval, saying ‘that she was holding back on documents. A spokesman forthe State Department, Alec Gerlach, rejected that assertion, arguing that inthe last month that Ms. Duval ‘worked atthe State Departmen, it provided the committee with 20,000 pages of documents and began reviewing more of Mas. Clinton??7s emails to hand over to the commie. ‘CAUTION: This message may contain information protected by the attorney client, attomey work product, deliberative [process or other privilege. No dissemination of this email message is authorized without the prior written approval ofthe Office of the General Counsel, Department of Defense. The guidance contained inthis email message is unofficial. If official ‘guidance is required, a written request must be submitted. The Office of the General Counsel provides no assurance as to the Integrity of this message's content after it has been sent to and received by the intended mail recipient. UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981087 Date: 05/31/2016C05981115°IED US. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981115 Date: 05/31/2016 [RELEASE IN PART B6) ‘MeLeod, Mary Wednesday, March 25, 2015 2:30 PM Visek, Richard C ; Bair, James P Rettig, Max L FW: Urgent follow-up question from reporter From: Sam Biddle| Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2015 2:01 PM To: Psaki, Jennifer R; Harf, Marie E; McLeod, Mary ‘Subject: Urgent follow-up question from reporter ‘ Hello all—to follow up on my previous email, I have a question regarding another leaked email from Sidney Blumenthal's account. A May 2011 message from Blumenthas account during the time he was providing intelligence memos wo Fllary Clinton describes a planned wip tothe Tunisian border with an operating budget of $60,000. What was tis rip? Was Clinton aware of it before orale i took place? Who was paying frit? Were ny State Department personnel involved? ‘Thankyou, “Sem Biddle i REVIEW AUTHORITY: sam biddle Reviewer PGP Key: bit.ly/IxxSvh9 This email is UNCLASSIFIED. UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981115 Date: 05/31/20160598111 7IED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981117 Date: 05/31/2016 vee: McLeod, Mary (RELEASE IN PART 85,06 Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2015 7:34 PM To: Gerlach, Alec Subject: Re: es At : BS Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone. From: McleodM@state-gov ‘Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2015 7:33 PM To: Gerlach, Alec Subject: Re: Could you give me a call? Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone. From: Gerlach, Alec Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2015 7:22 PM To: McLeod, Mary ‘Subject: Re: The Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone. From: McLeod, Mary ‘Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2015 7:15 PM To: Gerlach, Alec; Kennedy, Patrick F; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; Starr, Gregory 8; Prosser, Sarah E Subject: Re: Alec-| just saw this, Will get back after an urgent phone call. M ‘Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone. From: Gerlach, Alec ‘Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2015 6:57 PM ‘To: Kennedy, Patrick F; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen 7; Start, Gregory B; McLeod, Mary ‘Subject: RE: - BS sBu UTHORITY: Paul Blackburn, Senior Reviewer, This email is UNCLASSIFIED. — ne UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981117 Date: 05/31/2016C05981117°IED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981117 Date: 05/31/2016 ~ From: Kennedy, Patrick F ‘Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2015 6: ‘To: Gerlach, Alec; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; Starr, Gregory B ssubgects RE: Interesting ‘Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2015 6:35 PM x ‘To: Kennedy, Patrick F; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; Starr, Gregory 8 Subject: RE: Sorry ~ I put the wrong Starr on. seu This email is UNCLASSIFIED. From: Geriach, Alec ‘Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2015 6:33 PM To: Kennedy, Patrick F; Starr, Katherine L; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T ‘Subject: FW: From: Kumar, Anita ‘Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2015 5:32 PM To: Gerlach, Alec Subject: Here's the info on what people said could be done: ‘Once the hack occured, the domain name for Clinton's host server was easily obtainable and her secount was likely vulnerable, experts said, “Somebody could lookup information about the registrar for that domainname,” identify the unique TP adress for her account, locate the email server "and find out what vulnerabilities might be associated with tht server. “There were certainly some security precautions that the State Department end others could have suggested atthe time to secure the huge cache of emails stil on the former seeretary’s private server, For example, there are weekly security “patches” that ean help shield an eral server from uninvited iniruders, In adtion, there ‘were ways to harden her server's network a0 that onl fllyseeured networks would be allowed access UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. 05981117 Date: 05/31/2016 BSC05981117°IED US. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981117 Date: 05/31/2016 ‘Another expert si ‘Alt the very least the Slate Department should have immediately checked with Clinton to see what ype of ser authentication Clinton relied on Authentication ensues that the user is in fact the account holder. A passwords the fst level of authentication However, the federal goverment snow moving ward Fingerprint verification as well and Ul security mearure wes evailble at he me of he hack Anita Kumar White House Correspondent McClatchy Newspapers - 202-383-6017 (office) | Tatchyde. ‘Twitter: @anitakumar01 ‘This emails UNCLASSIFIED. . UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No, F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981117 Date: 05/31/201605981122 FIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. 05981122 Date: 05/31/2016 RELEASE IN PART BS) McLeod, Mary Sent: ‘Thursday, October 1, 2015 5:06 PM Tot Beechem, Stephanie ; Stout, Jennifer P , Hickey, Lauren A ; Kirby, John ; Gerlach, Alec , Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T ; Kennedy, Patrick F ; Evers, Austin R ; Finer, Jonathan J ; Rubin, Joshua A ; Visek, Richard C ; Smith, Daniel B ; Totier, Mark C ; Prosser, Sarah E ; Frifield, Julia E ; Fisher, Julie D , Higginbottom, Heather A ; Snyder, Eric J Subject: RE: FBI. Chief Says Politics Won’t Interfere With Inquiry on Hillary Clinton's Email From: BS This email is UNCLASSIFIED. From: Beechem, Stephanie ‘Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2015 4:52 PM To: Stout, Jennifer P; Hickey, Lauren A; Kirby, John; McLeod, Mary; Gerlach, Alec; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen 7; Kennedy, Patrick F; Evers, Austin R; Finer, Jonathan J; Rubin, Joshua A; Visek, Richard C; Smith, Daniel B; Toner, Mark C; Prosser, Sarah €; Frifeld, Jula €; Fisher, Jule D; Higginbottom, Heather A; Snyder, Eric 3 ‘Subject: NYT: F.8.1. Chief Says Poltics Won’ Interfere With Inquiry on Hillary Clinton's Email, | http:/mobile.nytimes.com/2015/10/02/us/politics/fbi-hillary-clinton-emails. htm! FBI Chief Says Politics Won't Interfere With Inquiry on Hillary Clinton’s Email ‘By MICHAEL S. SCHMIDT OCTOBER 1, 2015 WASHINGTON — The F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, said Thursday that he was certain the bureau ‘would be able to complete the investigation into Hillary Rodham Clinton’s personal email account in a timely manner and that he would make sure politics did not interfere with it. “Lam following this very closely, and I get briefed on it regularly,” Mr. Comey said at a quarterly meeting with reporters at F.B.I. headquarters, He added, “I'am confident we have the resources and the personnel assigned to the matter, as we do all ‘our work, so that we are able to do it in a professional, prompt and independent way.” sul Blackburn, Senior Reviewer UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981122 Date: 05/31/2016C05981122°IED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981122 Date: 05/31/2016 ‘The F.B.L opened an investigation this summer into how classified materials were handled in ‘connection with Mrs. Clinton’s account when she was secretary of state in response to a referral from the inspector general of the intelligence community. The inspector general, I. Charles McCullough TI, had said that sensitive national security information had been found in the account. Iti illegal to have classified information on an unsecure network. Mrs. Clinton, who is seeking the Democratic nomination for president, has said that she complied with all federal laws and regulations regarding email use. Mr. Comey declined to discuss the specifics ofthe inquiry, but said that one of the reasons he has a 10- ‘year term as director was “to make sure this organization stays outside of politics,” “If you know my folks, you know they don’t give @ rip about politics,” Mr. Comey said. “And my job as director of the F BI. is to ensure that we remain those things I said we are: competent, honest and independent — and that we do our work well. Part of doing our work well is we don't talk about it while we do it” Mr. Comey declined to answer a question about whether he would make the results of the investigation public when it is completed, even if charges are not filed. He said that lawmakers on Capitol Hill had asked him recently about the investigation, but he said that he had declined to discuss it with them UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981122 Date: 05/31/2016C05981125/ED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981125 Date: 05/31/2016 — McLeod, Mary [RELEASE IN PART Sent: ‘Thursday, October 22, 2015 11:24 AM (85,56 To: Visek, Richard C Subject: RE: Status on AIE Case 13 Excellent reply. | Coordination, coordination, coordination. BS This email is UNCLASSIFIED, From: Visek, Richard C ‘Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2015 9:37 AM To: Frifield, Julia E; McLeod, Mary ‘Subject: RE: Status on AIE Case 13 * From: Frifeld, Julia E ‘Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2015 9:25 AM To: McLeod, Mary; Visek, Richard C Subject: FW: Status on AIE Case 13 ‘Schram, Zachary I ‘Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2015 9:05 AM To: Frfield, Julia E; Vadai, Pranay R ‘Subject: Fwd: Status on AIE Case 13 From: Welcher, Alison R Date: October 21, 2015 at 3:52:16 PM EDT To: Scholl, Margaret 8 ,Agurkis, Julie Ce: Harris, Katherine A Deck, Laura E ,Bemish, Renee C , Johnston, Amy L Prosser, Sarah (REVIEW AUTHORITY: Paul Blackburn, Senior Reviewer, UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981125 Date: 05/31/2016C05981125FIED USS. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. CO5981125 Date: 05/31/2016 E Bair, James P ,Congressional Document Production Branch (CDPB) ,Thomas, Kenneth A ,Stein, Eric F Gregory, Joyce D ,Schram, Zachary | Subject: RE: Status on AIE Case 13, seu s ‘This email is UNCLASSIFIED. From: Scholl, Margaret 8 ‘Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2015 3:48 PM To: Agurks, Julie ‘Ce: Congressional Document Production Branch (CDPB); Schram, Zachary I; Prosser, Sarah E; Deck, Laura E; Welcher, Alison R; Bair, James ?; Thomas, Kenneth A; Stein, Eric F; Gregory, Joyce D; Harris, Katherine A; Bemish, Renee C; Johnston, Amy L ‘Subject: RE: Status on AIE Case 13 Hi Julie, | Have review priorities changed? Thank you and have’a great day! ? Margaret Margaret 8. Scholl US. Department of State Branch Chief A/GIS/IPS/COP Room 6117 SA-2 (202) 663-3187 Z holMB@stal seu UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04648 Doc No. C05981125 Date: 05/31/2018 BSC05981125%1ED US. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04846 Doc No. C05981125 Date: 05/31/2016 ‘This email is UNCLASSIFIED. From: Agurkis, Julie ‘Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2015 5:07 PM To: Scholl, Margaret B Ce: Congressional Document Production Branch (CDPB); Schram, Zachary I Subject: Status on AIE Case 13 Hi Margaret, | know the tasker for case # 13 (Art in Embassies) has not closed yet, but could you provide an update on what the COP has received thus far and what bureaus still need to send in a response? ‘Also, will CDP be able to shift reviewers from case # 6 over to other cases starting Friday? Thanks, Julie Julie A. Agurkis ' Congressional Adviser Bureau of Legislative Affairs US. Department of State Office: (202) 647-8142 Cell BU ‘This emails UNCLASSIFIED. UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04846 Doc No. C05981125 Date: 05/31/2016 BeC05981127FIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981127 Date: 05/31/2016 From: Sent: To: Subject: McLeod, Mary Wednesday, August 19, 2015 7:45 PM Gerlach, Alec ; Kennedy, Patrick F ; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T ; Starr, Gregory B ; Prosser, Sarah E Re BS Happy to Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone. From: McLeod, Mary Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2015 7:15 PM ‘To: Gerlach, Alec; Kennedy, Patrick F; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; Starr, Gregory 8; Prosser, Sarah E Subject: Alec-| just saw this. Will get back after an urgent phone call. M Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone. From: Gerlach, Alec Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2015 6:57 PM To: Kennedy, Patrick F; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; Starr, Gregory B; McLeod, Mary Subject: RE: sBU ‘This email is UNCLASSIFIED. From: Kennedy, Patrick F Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2015 6:44 PM To: Gerlach, Alec; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; Starr, Gregory 8 Subject: RE: _ Interesting regards pat REVIEW AUTHORITY: Paul Blackburn, Senior Reviewer UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981127 Date: 05/31/2016C05981127IED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No, C05981127 Date: 05/31/2016 From: Gerlach, Alec ‘Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2015 6:35 PM ‘To: Kennedy, Patrick F; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; Starr, Gregory B ‘Subject: RE: Sorry ~ | put the wrong Starr on, sBU This email is UNCLASSIFIED. From: Gerlach, Alec Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2015 6:33 PM ‘To: Kennedy, Patrick F; Starr, Katherine L; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T Subject: FW: From: Kumar, Anita Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2015 5:32PM ‘To: Gerlach, Alec Subject: Here's the info on what people said could be done: ‘Once the hack occured, the domain name fo Clinton's host server wes easily obtainable and he account was ikely vulnerable, experts ssid “Somebody could look up information about the registrar for that domainname," identify the unique IP adres fr ber account, locate the email server “and find out what valnerablites might be associated with that sever. "There were certainly some security precautions tha the State Department and others could have suggested” at the time to secure ‘he huge cache of email sill on the former secretary's private server. For example, there are weekly secunty “patches” that can help shield an email sever from uninvited intruders n addition, there ‘were way’ to harden her server's network 20 that ony filly ssoured networks would be allowed access ‘Another expert said: ‘At the very leat, the State Department should have immediately checked with Clinton 1 se what typeof ser authentiation Clinton reied on, ‘Authentication ensures thatthe user isin Fct the scoount holdet. A password i the frst eve oF authentication. However, the federal government is now moving toward fingerprint verification as well, and that security measure was available at the time of the hack Anita Kumar White House Correspondent UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981127 Date: 05/31/2016C05981127FIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04648 Doc No. C05981127 Date: 05/31/2016 McClatchy Newspapers. -383-6017 (office) ‘Twitter: @anitakumar01 ‘This email is UNCLASSIFIED. UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981127 Date: 05/31/2018 BeC05981133FIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04846 Doc No. C05981133 Date: 05/31/2016 _— McLeod, Mary Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 5:15 PM To: Evers, Austin R ; Kennedy, Patrick F ; Hickey, Lauren A ; Finer, Jonathan J ; Gerlach, Alec ; Stout, Jennifer P ; Fisher, Julie D ; deBree, Mary L ; Beechem, Stephanie ; Prosser, Sarah E , Macmanus, Joseph E ; Toner, Mark C ; Rubin, Joshua A , Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T Ce: Maier, Christina A . Re: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone. From: Evers, Austin R ‘Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 5:07 PM To: Kennedy, Patrick F; Hickey, Lauren A; Finer, Jonathan J; Gerlach, Alec; Stout, Jennifer P; Fisher, Julle D; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; McLeod, Mary; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; . Rubin, Joshua A; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T Ce: Maier, Christina A ‘Subject: RE: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! sBU This email is UNCLASSIFIED. From: Kennedy, Patrick F Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2035 4:51 PM ‘To: Hickey, Lauren A; Finer, Jonathan 3; Gerlach, Alec; Stout, Jennifer P; Fisher, Jule D; deBree, Mary Beechem, Stephanie; McLeod, Mary; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Rubin, Joshua A; Evers, Austin R; Austr-Ferguson, Kathleen T Review AUTHORITY: Paul Blackburn, Senior Reviewer UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04648 Doc No. C05981133 Date: 05/31/2016C05981133FIED US. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04846 Doc No. C05981133 Date: 05/31/2016 (Ce: Maier, Christina A Subject: RE: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! Colleagues BS From: Hickey, Lauren A ‘Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 4:47 PM ‘To: Finer, Jonathan J; Gerlach, Alec; Kennedy, Patrick F; Stout, Jennifer P; Fisher, Julie D; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; McLeod, Mary; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Rubin, Joshua A; Evers, Austin R; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T ‘Ce: Maier, Christina A Subject: :00 Meeting Today (Friday)! ‘Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 ickey, Lauren A; Gerlach, Alec; Kennedy, Patrick F; Stout, Jennifer P; Fishe?, Julie D; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; McLeod, Mary; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Rubin, Joshua A; Evers, Austin R; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T lier, Christina A ‘Meeting Today (Friday)! From: Hickey, Lauren A Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 03:58 PM UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981133 Date: 05/31/2016C05981133/ED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981133 Date: 05/31/2016 To: Gerlach, Alec; Kennedy, Patrick F; Stout, Jennifer P; Fisher, Jule D; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; McLeod, Mary; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Rubin, Joshua A; Evers, Austin R; Austin- Ferguson, Kathleen T; Finer, Jonathan Ce: Maier, Christina A ‘Subject: RE: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! Lauren seu This email is UNCLASSIFIED, : Gerlach, Alec Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 1:15 PM To: Kennedy, Patrick F; Stout, Jennifer P; Fisher, Julie D; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren McLeod, Mary; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Rubin, Joshua A; Evers, Austin R; Austin Ferguson, Kathleen T; Finer, Jonathan Ce: Maier, Christina A Subject: RE: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04648 Doc No. C05981133 Date: 05/31/2016C05981133FIED USS. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981133 Date: 05/31/2016 ] BS seu This email is UNCLASSIFIED. From: Kennedy, Patrick F ‘Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 12:54 PM To: Gerlach, Alec; Stout, Jennifer P; Fisher, Julle D; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; McLeod, Mary; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Duval, Catherine S; Rubin; Joshua A; Evers, Austin R; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; Finer, Jonathan Ce: Maier, Christina A ‘Subject: Re: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981133 Date: 05/31/2016C0598113351ED US. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981133 Date: 05/31/2016 Regards Pat From: Geriach, Alec Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 09:45 AM ‘To: Stout, Jennifer P; Kennedy, Patrick F; Fisher, Jule D; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; McLeod, Mary; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Duval, Catherine S; Rubin, Joshua A; Evers, Austin R; Austn-Ferguson, Kathleen T; Finer, Jonathan 3 ‘Subject: Re: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! ‘When State Department officials first discovered that Hillary Rodham Ciinton's personal email account contained classified information, they did not seize the thumb drive containing her digitally archived inbox but rather provided a special safe that allowed her attorney to securely keep the materials from the intelligence community for several more weeks, according to interviews and documents, ‘And throughout the review process, career State officials who normally handle the release of data under the Freedom of Information Act ran into opposition from lawyers who disagreed with some of their determinations that information in the emails was classified, The Washington Times has learned. ‘The ongoing process has already flagged 60 of Mrs. Clinton's personal emails for containing classified information at the “confidentiat” or “secret” level, although there's a debate raging over additional emails, the intelligence community and career workers believe contains more sensitive top-secret data, officials confirmed, Amid the tensions, some-career State employees have now alerted the intelligence community to irregularities that they fear may be part of a political effort to hide from the public the true extent of Classified information that passed through her personal account, people familiar with the matter told ‘The Washington Times. ‘Their concems include that one or more State Department lawyers involved in the production of the former secretary of state's emails to Congress and a federal court have ties to Mrs. Clinton's private lawyer's firm, creating at least the perception intemally of a conflict of interest, sources told the Tir speaking only on condition of anonymity ‘The complaints were received by Intelligence Community Inspector General |. Charles McCullough III's office in recent weeks, and have been referred to the State Department's chief watchdog, the sources UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981133 Date: 05/31/2016 BSC05981133/ED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981133 Date: 05/31/2016 said, ‘The development opens up @ potential new investigative front in a controversy that has already tamished Mrs. Ciinton’s 2016 presidential bic “At present, they (the career officials) have not formally sought whistleblower status but their disclosures are likely legally protected from retaliation since they involve matters affecting Congress, the courts and national security," one of the sources directly familiar with the matter told the Times. Since the revelation this spring that Mrs. Clinton had a private email server where she conducted some official business, the State Department has been busy reviewing some 30,000 emails in that account {oc posable slease to both re House Select Comnstian on Banghen ane federal court handing & FOIA lawsuit. State officials told the Times they are aware of tensions and disagreements during the extraordinary review process and are content to let State Inspector General Stephen Linick, the department's independent watchdog, take the lead in resolving them. ‘They noted that Secretary of State John Kerry this spring, well before intemal disputes arose, asked Mr. Linick to review the department's security standards that allowed Mrs, Clinton to conduct official business on a private email account. “Secretary Kerry affirmatively asked for the State Department inspector General to review the Department's records maintenance and FOIA processes and provide recommendations," the department said in a statement to the Times. “As is customary, the IG’s review is entirely independent, and they are free to speak to any Department employees in the course of their work.” State officials acknowiedged that one extraordinary step taken by the department's leadership occurred in May when reviewing officials identified the first pieces of classified information inside Mrs. Clinton's personal email At the time, Stale officials only had access to paper copies of the emails but were aware that Mrs. Clinton’s personal attomey, David Kendall, had an electronic copy of her email inbox in a .pst format stored on a thumb drive, The .pst format is commonly used for email programs like Microsoft Outiook. Rather than seize the thumb drive and tum it over to the intelligence community, State yielded to concems about violating Mrs. Clinton’s attorney-client privilege and instead provided a special secure safe capable of protecting classified information up to the “secret” level, officials confirmed to the Times. ‘That arrangement allowed Mr. Kendall to keep the electronic archive from the intelligence community for several more weeks unti the ongoing review flagged at least two emails containing possible top- ‘secret information, the most sensitive of the nation’s intelligence, officials acknowledged. ‘The most recent revelation about possible top-secret information finally prompted Mr. Kendall to turn ‘over the thumb drive as well as the original email server's hard drive to the FBI in recent days. While career officials found the arrangement with the safe to be unusual, they also ran into disagreements with lawyers from the department's legal counsel's office conceming which passages inside Mrs. Clinton's private emails should be declared classified in the FOIA lawsuit ‘The career employees told the intelligence community some of the email passages they flagged to be ‘exempted for release under FOIA as classified were altered during the legal review process to other exemptions, such as "deliberative privilege," according to sources familiar with the concerns. UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981133 Date: 05/31/2016C05981133°IED US. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981133 Date: 05/31/2016 ‘The whistleblowers told the intelligence community they feared the changes were a deliberate effort to hide from the public the true extent of classified secrets that flowed through Mrs. Clinton's personal ‘email account anc that they risked misleading the judge in the court case, sources said. ‘State officials acknowledged to the Times that the multiple layers of review have resulted in different determinations about classification, in part because lawyers are concemed about what is known in the intelligence world as “dual-source" information. ‘Dual source information involves situations in which the intelligence community reports information through classified channels at the same time open sources like the news media disclose the same. event. For instance, the Pentagon may report to State officials a drone strike killed a terrorist leader with the ‘specifics of the location, the type of drone used and the intelligence that led to the strike while the news media may report the drone strike and death based on an announcement of a foreign government or terror organization, ‘After FOIA officials first flag information in Mrs. Clinton’s personal email as existing inside the nation’s Classified intelligence system, the lawyers have tried to determine whether the information may also have come from public sources, officials explained to the Ties. Complicating the review process is the fact that some of the disputed emails in Mrs. Clinton's private inbox came from State officials who sent information via their official accounts, where classified information is supposed to be automatically flagged as such before it is sent or is blocked from being sent fo external addresses because it includes national secrets, the officials said. ‘The IC is looking at this as needing to protect classified information. And the lawyers are looking at this 2s they have to defend to a judge why Something was redacted from an email and kept from public release, especially if the FOIA case goes to appeal. Those are different responsibilities that create natural tensions," one official familiar with the process said. “IFIC flags a passage as classified and the lawyers later find that that information came through the official system unmarked (as classified) and there was public source information on the same subject, they are likely going to be reluctant to try to argue to a judge that the classification exemption applies,” the official explained. State officials said it may take weeks or months to resolve all the disputes but the goal is to reach consensus eventually between the intelligence community and State's various layers of review. ‘The officials said the department ultimately isn't tying to hide the extent to which classified information passed through Mrs. Clinton's private email account. They noted that while the media has focused on just a half dozen of Mrs. Clinton's personal emails containing secret intelligence, State's own internal review has already flagged 60 emails through July 30 containing classified data. And they expect that ‘number to rise before all 30,000 emails are reviewed, Of those first 60, nearly all contained classified secrets at the lowest level of “confidential” and one ‘contained information at the intermediate level of "secret," officals told the Times. And State officials are working with Mr. MeCollough's office two review two emails his team flagged as containing “top- secret information derived from possible Pentagon satelites, drones of intercepts, which is some of the nation's most sensitive secrets. “Where ever the facts end up, that is where the determination will end,” one official said. “The IGs have the independence to help us resolve these issues.” ‘Meanwhile, some of what is fueling career officials’ concerns is the apparent background of the lawyers UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04648 Doc No. C05981133 Date: 05/31/2016C05981133IED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981133 Date: 05/31/2016 involved in the email reviews for both Congress and the courts. The officals told the intelligence community they believe one or more of those lawyers previously worked at the Williams & Connolly law firm where Mrs. Clinton's lawyer, Mr. Kendall, is a senior partner. A check of public records identified at least one State Department lawyer, Catherine *Kate" Duval, who Previously worked at Wiliams & Connolly. A Palco profile identified Ms. Duval as having left Wiliams & Connolly to work for the Obama administration on the IRS targeting scandal before moving over to State in the last year. State officials confirmed to the Times that Ms. Duval has been working on Mrs. Clinton's emails but solely in the capacity of helping to produce those that are relevant to the House Special Committee on. Benghazi. She has no role in determining what should be exempted from FOIA documents as. dlassified, the officials stressed, ‘The officials said privacy laws prevented them from identifying any other lawyers inside their department who might previously have worked for Williams & Connolly but that they are confident none of the lawyers working on the email matter had any role in prior representation of Mrs. Clinton on personal matters. In the meantime, with tensions rising in Washington over the Clinton email scandal, the question of ‘whether the email production process involved political funny business or just differing bureaucratic responsibilities will fall for the time being on Mr. Linick, the State Department's internal watchdog, Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone. From: Stout, Jennifer P ‘Sent: Friday, August 14, 2015 8:43 PM To: Gerlach, Alec; Kennedy, Patrick F; Fisher, Julie D; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; McLeod, Mary; Prosser, Saran E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Duval, Catherine S; Rubin, Joshua A; Evers, Austin R; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; Finer, Jonathan J Subject: RE: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! ‘Thanks Alec, Lauren and Stephanie for the hard work on this today. From: Gerlach, Alec Sent: Friday, August 14, 2015 7:49 PM To: Stout, Jennifer P; Kennedy, Patrick F; Fisher, Julie D; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; McLeod, Mary; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Duval, Catherine S; Rubin, Joshua A; Evers, Austin R; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; Finer, Jonathan 3 ‘Subject: RE: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! , Thanks for quick responses today. I've sent along our response, and well keep you up to speed over the weekend as we hear back. ‘This email is UNCLASSIFIED. From: Stout, Jennifer P - Sent: Friday, August 14, 2015 7:07 PM To: Kennedy, Patrick F; Gerlach, Alec; Fisher, Julie D; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; " McLeod, Mary; Prosser, Sarah €; Macmianus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Duval, Catherine S; Rubin, Joshua A; Evers, Austin R; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; Finer, Jonathan J UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981133 Date: 05/31/2016C05981133FIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04645 Doc No. C05981133 Date: 05/31/2016 ‘Subject: RE: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! Good here as well. Thank you. From: Kennedy, Patrick F Sent: Friday, August 14, 2015 6:53 PM ‘To: Gerlach, Alec; Fisher, Julie D; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; McLeod, Mary; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Duval, Catherine S; Rubin, Joshua A; Evers, Austin R; ‘Stout, Jennifer P; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T ‘Subject: RE: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! (Ok for Austin-Ferguson and Kennedy From: Geriach, Alec Sent: Friday, August 14, 2015 6:44 PM To: Fisher, Julie D; deBree, Mary L; Beecher, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; McLeod, Mary; Kennedy, Patrick F: Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Duval, Catherine S; Rubin, Joshua A; Evers, Astin R; ‘Stout, Jenifer P; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T Subject: RE: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! BS UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981133 Date: 05/31/2016C05981133/ED US. Department of State Case No, F-2015-04646 Doc No, C05981133 Date: 05/31/2016 Bu ‘This email is UNCLASSIFIED. From: Fisher, Julie D Sent: Friday, August 14, 2015 6:15 PM To: Gerlach, Alec; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; McLeod, Mary; Kennedy, Patrick F; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Duval, Catherine S; Rubin, Joshua A; Evers, Austin Rj UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981133 Date: 05/31/2016 BSC05981133/ED US. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981133 Date: 05/31/2018 Stout, Jennifer P; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T ‘Subject: RE: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! Clear for D-MR. From: Geriach, Alec Sent: Friday, August 14, 2015 4:25 PM To: deBree, Mary L; Beecher, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; McLeod, Mary; Kennedy, Patrick F; Prosser, Sarah E; Fisher, Julie D; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Duval, Catherine S; Rubin, Joshua A; Evers, Austin R; Stout, Jennifer P; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T ‘Subject: RE: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! Please provide edits as soon as possible to the responses below - BS UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04846 Doc No. C05981133 Date: 05/31/2016€05981133/ED US. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981133 Date: 05/31/2016 BS sBU ‘This email is UNCLASSIFIED. From: deBree, Mary L ‘Sent: Friday, August 14, 2015 2:11 PM ‘To: Gerlach, Alec; Beechem, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; McLeod, Mary; Kennedy, Patrick F; Prosser, Sarah E; Fisher, Julie 0; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Duval, Catherine S; Evers, Austin R; Austin-Ferguson, kathleen T ‘Ce: Rubin, Joshua A; Bieber, Wendy M; Stout, Jennifer P; Smith, Brenda B; Cost, Lydia A; Helton-Floyd, Kathleen L ‘Subject: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! Importance: High Hi All Jen would like to have a meeting today at 3:00 in the S Conference room re: FOLA. Please let me know if you will not be able to join for the meeting today. . ‘Thank you. ’Mary- x Hootie of the Secretary Special Advisor aoetr ssia debreeml@istategov UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981133 Date: 05/31/2016C05981135/ED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981135 Date: 05/31/2016 RELEASE IN PART 88) McLeod, Mary Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 11:06 AM To: Finer, Jonathan J ; Beechem, Stephanie ; Gerlach, Alec ; Stout, Jennifer \ P , Kennedy, Patrick F ; Fisher, Julie D ; deBree, Mary L ; Hickey, Lauren A ; Prosser, Sarah E ; Macmanus, Joseph E ; Toner, Mark C ; Duval, Catherine S ; Rubin, Joshua A ; Evers, Austin R ; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T RE: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! BS This emai is UNCLASSIFIED, From: Finer, Jonathan 3 Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 10:50 AM To: Beechem, Stephanie; Gerlach, Alec; Stout, Jennifer P; Kennedy, Patrick F; Fisher, Julie D; deBree, Mary L; Hickey, Lauren A; McLeod, Mary; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Duval, Catherine S; Rubin, Joshua A; Evers, Austin R; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T | Subject: Re: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! | ] BS ‘Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 10:44 AM To: Finer, Jonathan J; Gerlach, Alec; Stout, Jennifer P; Kennedy, Patrick F; Fisher, Julie D; deBree, Mary Hickey, Lauren A; McLeod, Mary; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Duval, Catherine S; Rubin, Joshua A; Evers, Austin R; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T Subject: Re: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! ‘Complicating the review process is the fact that some of the disputed emails in Mrs. Clinton's Private inbox came from State officials who sent information via their official accounts, where REVIEW AUTHORITY: Paul Blackburn, Senior Reviewer} UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2018-04648 Doc No. C05981135 Date: 05/31/2016C05981135/ED US. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No, C05981135 Date: 05/31/2016 Classified information is supposed to be automatically flagged as such before itis sent or is blocked from being sent to external addresses because it includes national secrets, the officials said, From: Finer, Jonathan } ’ ‘Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 10:19 AM To: Gerlach, Alec; Stout, Jennifer P; Kennedy, Patrick F; Fisher, Julie D; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; McLeod, Mary; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Duval, Catherine S; Rubin, Joshua A; Evers, Austin R; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T. Subject: Re: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! From: Gerlach, Alec ‘Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 10:10 AM To: Stout, Jennifer P; Kennedy, Patrick F; Fisher, Julie D; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; McLeod, Mary; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Duval, Catherine S; Rubin, Joshua A; Evers, Austin R; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; Finer, Jonathan J UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981135 Date: 05/31/2016 BSC05981135/ED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981135 Date: 05/31/2016 Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone. From: Gerlach, Alec Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 9:45 AM To: Stout, Jennifer P; Kennedy, Patrick F; Fisher, Julie D; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren ‘A; McLeod, Mary; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmenus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Duval, Catherine S; Rubin, Joshua A; Evers, Austin R; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; Finer, Jonathan J ‘Subject: Re: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! BS ‘When State Department officials first discovered that Hillary Rodham Clinton's personal email account contained classified information, they did not seize the thumb drive containing her digitally archived inbox but rather provided a special safe that allowed her attomey to securely keep the materials from the inteligence community for several more weeks, according to interviews and documents. And throughout the review process, career State officials who normally handle the release of data under the Freedom of Information Act ran into opposition from lawyers who disagreed with some of their determinations that information in the emails was classified, The Washington Times has learned. ‘The ongoing process has already flagged 60 of Mrs. Clinton's personal emails for containing classified information at the “confidential or “secret” level, although there's a debate raging over additional emails ‘the intelligence community and career workers believe contains more sensitive top-secret data, officials confirmed. ‘Amid the tensions, some career State employees have now alerted the intelligence community to irregularities that they fear may be part of a political effort to hide from the public the true extent of Classified information that passed through her personal account, people familiar with the matter told The Washington Times. ‘Their concems include that one or more State Department lawyers involved in the production of the former secretary of state's emails to Congress and a federal court have ties to Mrs. Clinton's private lawyer's firm, creating at least the perception intemally of a conflict of interest, sources told the Times, speaking only on condition of anonymity. ‘The complaints were received by Intelligence Community Inspector General |. Charles McCullough II's office in recent weeks, and have been referred to the State Department's chief watchdog, the sources said. ‘The development opens up a potential new investigative front in a controversy that has already tamished Mrs. Clinton's 2016 presidential bid. “At present, they (the career officals) have not formally sought whistleblower status but their disclosures are likely legally protected from retaliation since they involve matters affecting Congress, the courts and national security," one of the sources directly familiar with the matter told the Times. ‘Since the revelation this spring that Mrs. Clinton had a private email server where she conducted some official business, the State Department has been busy reviewing some 30,000 emails in that account for possible release to both the House Select Committee on Benghazi and a federal court handling @ FOIA lawsuit, UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981135 Date: 05/31/2016C05981135FIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04648 Doc No. C05981135 Date: 05/31/2016 ‘State officials told the Times they are aware of tensions and disagreements during the extraordinary review process and are content to let State Inspector General Stephen Linick, the department's independent watchdog, take the lead in resolving them, They noted that Secretary of State John Kerry this spring, well before intemal disputes arose, asked Mr. Linick to review the department's security standards that allowed Mrs. Clinton to conduct offical business on a private email account. “Secretary Kerry affirmatively asked for the State Department Inspector General to review the Department's records maintenance and FOIA processes and provide recommendations," the department said in a statement to the Times. “As is customary, the IG's review is entirely independent, and they are free to speak to any Department employees in the course of their wort.” ‘State officials acknowledged that one extraordinary step taken by the department's leadership occurred in May when reviewing officials identified the first pieces of classified information inside Mrs. Clinton's personal email At the time, State officials only had access to paper copies of the emails but were aware that Mrs. Clinton's personal attorney, David Kendall, had an electronic copy of her email inbox in a pst format stored on a thumb drive. The .pst format is commonly used for email programs like Microsoft utlook. Rather than seize the thumb drive and tum it over to the intelligence community, State yielded to ‘concems about violating Mrs. Clinton's attorney-client privilege and instead provided a special secure safe capable of protecting classified information up to the “secret” level, officials confirmed to the Times, ‘That arrangement allowed Mr. Kendall to keep the electronic archive from the intelligence community for several more weeks until the ongoing review flagged at least two emails containing possible top- secret information, the most sensitive of the nation’s intelligence, officials acknowledged. ‘The most recent revelation about possible top-secret information finally prompted Mr. Kendall to turn ‘over the thumb drive as well as the original email server's hard drive to the FB! in recent days. While career officials found the arrangement with the safe to be unusual, they also ran into disagreements with lawyers from the department's legal counse''s office conceming which passages inside Mrs. Clinton's private emails should be declared classified in the FOIA lawsuit ‘The career employees told the intelligence community some of the email passages they flagged to be ‘exempted for release under FOIA as classified were altered during the legal review process to other ‘exemptions, such as “deliberative privilege,” according to sources familar with the concerns. ‘The whistleblowers told the inteligence community they feared the changes were a deliberate effort to hide from the public the true extent of classified secrets that flowed through Mrs. Clinton's personal email account and that they risked misleading the judge in the court case, sources said State officials acknowledged to the Times that the multiple layers of review have resulted in different determinations about classification, in part because lawyers are concerned about what is known in the inteligence world as “dual-source” information. ‘Dual source information involves situations in which the intelligence community reports information through classified channels at the same time open sources like the news media disclose the same event. ferrorist leader with the For instance, the Pentagon may report to State officials a drone strike killed UNCLASSIFIED U.S, Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981135 Date: 05/31/2016C059811357IED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981135 Date: 05/31/2016 ‘Specifics of the location, the type of drone used and the intelligence that led to the strike while the news media may report the drone strike and death based on an announcement of a foreign government or terror organization, ‘After FOIA officials first flag information in Mrs. Clinton's personal email as existing inside the nation’s Classified intelligence system, the lawyers have tried to determine whether the information may also have come from public sources, officials explained to the Ties. ‘Complicating the review process is the fact that some of the disputed emails in Mrs. Clinton's private inbox came from State officials who sent information via their official accounts, where classified information is supposed to be automatically flagged as such before it is sent or is blocked from being ‘sent to external addresses because it includes national secrets, the officals said. “The IC is looking at this as needing to protect classified information, And the lawyers are looking at this as they have to defend to a judge why something was redacted from an email and kept from public ‘release, especially if the FOIA case goes to appeal. Those are different responsibilities that create ratural tensions,” one official familiar with the process said. “If IC flags a passage as classified and the lawyers later find that that information came through the official system unmarked (as classified) and there was public source information on the same subject, they are likely going to be reluctant to try to argue to a judge that the classification exemption applies,” the official explained, State offcials said it may take weeks or months to resolve all the disputes but the goal is to reach ‘consensus eventually between the inteligence community and State's various layers of review. ‘The officials said the department ultimately isn’t trying to hide the extent to which classified information passed through Mrs. Clinton's private email account. They noted that while the media has focused on just a half dozen of Mrs. Clinton's personal emails containing secret intelligence, State's own internal review has already flagged 60 emails through July 30 containing classified data. And they expect that umber to rise before all 30,000 emails are reviewed Of those first 60, neariy all contained classified secrets at the lowest level of “confidential” and one ‘contained information at the intermediate level of “secret,” officials told the Times. And State officials are working with Mr. McCollough's office two review two emails his team flagged as containing “top- secret’ information derived from possible Pentagon satellites, drones of intercepts, which is some of the nation’s most sensitive secrets, “Where ever the facts end up, that is where the determination will end,” one official said. “The IGs have the independence to help us resoive these issues.” Meanwhile, some of what is fueling career officials’ concems is the apparent background of the lawyers involved in the email reviews for both Congress and the courts. The officials told the intelligence ‘community they believe one or more of those lawyers previously worked at the Wiliams & Connolly law firm where Mrs. Clinton's lawyer, Mr. Kendall, is @ senior partner. ‘A check of public records identified at least one State Department lawyer, Catherine “Kate” Duval, who Previously worked at Williams & Connolly. A Politico profile identified Ms. ‘Duval as having left Williams & Connolly to work for the Obama administration on the IRS targeting scandal before moving over to State in the last year. State officials confirmed to the Times that Ms. Duval has been working on Mrs, Clinton's emails but solely in the capacity of helping to produce those that are relevant to the House Special Committee on Benghazi. ‘She has no role in determining what should be exempted from FOIA documents as classified, the officials stressed. UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981135 Date: 05/31/2016C05981135/ED US. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981135 Date: 05/31/2016 ‘The officials said privacy laws prevented them from identifying any other lawyers inside their department who might previously have worked for Williams & Connolly but that they are confident none of the lawyers working on the email matter had any role in prior representation of Mrs. Clinton on personal matters In the meantime, with tensions rising in Washington over the Ciinton email scandal, the question of whether the email production process involved political funny business or just differing bureaucratic responsibilities will fall for the time being on Mr. Linick, the State Department's internal watchdog, Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone. From: Stout, Jennifer P ‘Sent: Friday, August 14, 2015 8:43 PM To: Gerlach, Alec; Kennedy, Patrick F; Fisher, Julie D; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; McLeod, Mary; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Duval, Catherine S; Rubin, Joshua A; Evers, Austin R; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; Finer, Jonathan J ‘Subject: RE: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! Thanks Alec, Lauren and Stephanie for the hard work on this today. From: Gerlach, Alec ‘Sent: Friday, August 14, 2015 7:49 PM To: Stout, Jennifer P; Kennedy, Patrick F; Fisher, Julie D; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; McLeod, Mary; Prosser, Sarah €; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Duval, Catherine S; Rubin, Joshua A; Evers, Austin R; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; Finer, Jonathan 3 Subject: RE: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! ‘Thanks for quick responses today. I've sent along our response, and we'll keep you up to speed over the weekend as we hear back. This email is UNCLASSIFIED. From: Stout, Jennifer P » Sent: Friday, August 14, 2015 7:07 PM To: Kennedy, Patrick F; Gerlach, Alec; Fisher, Julie D; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; McLeod, Mary; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Duval, Catherine S; Rubin, Joshua A; Evers, Austin R; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; Finer, Jonathan J ‘Subject: RE: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! Good here as well. Thank you. From: Kennedy, Patrick F Sent: Friday, August 14, 2015 6:53 PM ‘To: Gerlach, Alec; Fisher, Julie D; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; McLeod, Mary; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Duval, Catherine S; Rubin, Joshua A; Evers, Austin R; Stout, Jennifer P; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T ‘Subject: RE: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! (Ok for Austin-Ferguson and Kennedy UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981135 Date: 05/31/2016C059811351ED US. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04648 Doc No, C05981135 Date: 05/31/2016 From: Gerlach, Alec Sent: Friday, August 14, 2015 6:44 PM ‘To: Fisher, Julie D; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; McLeod, Mary; Kennedy, Patrick F; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Duval, Catherine S; Rubin, Joshua A; Evers, Austin R; ‘Stout, Jennifer P; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T ‘Subject: RE: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! BS UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04848 Doc No. C05981135 Date: 05/31/2016C05981135FIED US. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No, C05981135 Date: 05/31/2016 sBU This email is UNCLASSIFIED. From: Fisher, Julie D Sent: Friday, August 14, 2015 6:15 PM To: Geriach, Alec; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; McLeod, Mary; Kennedy, Patrick F; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Duval, Catherine S; Rubin, Joshua A; Evers, Austin Ri Stout, Jennifer P; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T ‘Subject: RE: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! Clear for D-MR. From: Gerlach, Alec ‘Sent: Friday, August 14, 2015 4:25 PM To: deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; McLeod, Mary; Kennedy, Patrick F; Prosser, Sarah E; Fisher, Julie 0; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Duval, Catherine S; Rubin, Joshua A; Evers, Austin R; Stout, Jennifer P; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T Subject: RE: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981135 Date: 05/31/2016 BSC05981135/ED US. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04648 Doc No. C05981135 Date: 05/31/2016 Please provide edits as soon as possible to the responses below UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. 05981135 Date: 05/31/2016 BSC05981135°1ED US. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981135 Date: 05/31/2016 | BS ‘BU This email is UNCLASSIFIED. From: deBree, Mary L ‘Sent: Friday, August 14, 2015 2:11 PM ‘To: Gerlach, Alec; Beechem, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; McLeod, Mary; Kennedy, Patrick F; Prosser, Sarah E; Fisher, Julie 0; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Duval, Catherine S; Evers, Austin R; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T Cc: Rubin, Joshua A; Bieber, Wendy M; Stout, Jennifer P; Smith, Brenda B; Cost, Lydia A; Helton-Floyd, Kathleen L ‘Subject: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! Importance: High HAD Jen would lke to have a meeting today at 3:00 in the $ Conference room re: FOIA. Please let me know if you will not be able to join for the meeting today. ‘Thank you. Mary. lore sea Special Advisor 202-647-5548 debreemi@state gov UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981135 Date: 05/31/2016C05981136IED US. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981136 Date: 05/31/2016 McLeod, Mary Friday, August 14, 2015 6:50 PM Prosser, Sarah E Subject: Re: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! Sarah—Why don't you clear on behalf of L. Best, Mary Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone. From: Prosser, Sarah E ‘Sent: Friday, August 14, 2015 6:48 PM To: McLeod, Mary ‘Subject: FW: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! Mary, fm ok with this version. Would you prefer to respond for L? Alternatively, | could reply-to-all and just speak for myselt. Best wishes, Sarah ‘sBU ‘This email is UNCLASSIFIED, From: Gerlach, Alec Sent: Friday, August 14, 2015 6:44 PM * To: Fisher, Julie D; deBree,.Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; McLeod, Mary; Kennedy, Patrick F; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Duval, Catherine S; Rubin, Joshua A; Evers, Austin R; Stout, Jennifer P; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T Subject: RE: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! REVIEW AUTHORITY: Paul Blackburn, UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981136 Date: 05/31/2016C059811367IED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981136 Date: 05/31/2016 UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981136 Date: 05/31/2016 BSC05981136IED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981136 Date: 05/31/2016 sBU ‘This email is UNCLASSIFIED. Sent: Friday, August 14, 2015 6:15 PM ‘To: Geriach, Alec; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; McLeod, Mary; Kennedy, Patrick F; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmarus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Duval, Catherine S; Rubin, Joshua A; Evers, Austin R; Stout, Jennifer P; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen Subject: RE: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! Clear for D-MR. From: Gerlach, Alec Sent: Friday, August 14, 2015 4:25 PM To: deBree, Mary L; Seechem, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; McLeod, Mary; Kennedy, Patrick F; Prosser, Sarah E; Fisher, Jule D; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Duval, Catherine S; Rubin, Joshua A; Evers, Austin R; Stout, Jennifer P; Austin-Ferguson, Kathieen T Subject: RE: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday) Please provide edits as soon as possible to the responses below - UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981136 Date: 05/31/2016C05981136%1ED US. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No, C05981136 Date: 05/31/2016 BS su ‘This email is UNCLASSIFIED. From: deBree, Mary L Sent: Friday, August 14, 2015 2:11 PM ‘To: Gerlach, Alec; Beechem, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; McLeod, Mary; Kennedy, Patrick F; Prosser, Sarah E; Fisher, Julie 0; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Duval, Catherine S; Evers, Austin R; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T ‘Ce; Rubin, Joshua A; Bieber, Wendy M; Stout, Jennifer P; Smith, Brenda B; Cost, Lydia A; Helton-Floyd, Kathleen UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981136 Date: 05/31/2016C059811367ED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981136 Date: 05/31/2016 L Subject: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! . Importance: High Hi All- Jen would like to have a meeting today at 3:00 in the S Conference room re: FOIA. Please let me know if you will not be able to join for the meeting today. ‘Thank you. Mary. es, orice oft sca Special Advisor 202-647-5548, debreem@staego UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981136 Date: 05/31/2016C05981139IED US. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981139 Date: 05/31/2016 RELEASE — McLeod, ABUSTATHOI [RELEASE IN PART B6 CC From: AGICN=RECIPIENTS/CN-MCLEODM> Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 7:10 PM To: Geriach, Alec ; Kennedy, Patrick F ; Evers, Austin R ; Finer, Jonathan J ; Hickey, Lauren A ; Stout, Jennifer P ; Fisher, Julie D ; deBree, Mary L ; Beechem, Stephanie ; Prosser, Sarah E ; Macmanus, Joseph E ; Toner, Mark C ; Rubin, Joshua A ; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T ‘; Kirby, John Ce: Maier, Christina A “MaierCA@state gov> Subject: Re: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! ~ OK by me Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone. From: Gerlach, Alec Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 7:08 PM. To: McLeod, Mary; Kennedy, Patrick F; Evers, Austin R; Finer, Jonathan J; Hickey, Lauren A; Stout, Jennifer P; Fisher, Julie D; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Rubin, Joshua A; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; Kirby, John Ce: Maier, Christina A ‘Subject: RE: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! BS BU This email is UNCLASSIFIED. From: McLeod, Mary ‘Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 6:59 PM To: Gerlach, Alec; Kennedy, Patrick F; Evers, Austin R; Finer, Jonathan J; Hickey, Lauren A; Stout, Jennifer P; Fisher, Julie 0; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Rubin, Joshua A; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; Kirby, John Gc: Maier, Christina A : 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! [REVIEW AUTHORITY: Paul Blackburn, Senior Reviewer, UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981139 Date: 05/31/2016C05981139%IED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No, C05981139 Date: 05/31/2016 ‘Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone. From: Gerlach, Alec Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 6:52 PM To: Kennedy, Patrick F; Evers, Austin R; McLeod, Mary; Finer, Jonathan 3; Hickey, Lauren A; Stout, Jennifer P; Fisher, Julie 0; deBree, Mary L; Beecher, Stephanie; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Rubin, Joshua A; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; Kirby, John Ce: Maier, Christina A Subject: RE: 300 Meeting Today (Fiay)! Is UNCLASSIFIED. From: Kennedy, Patrick F ‘Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 6:22 PM ‘To: Gerlach, Alec; Evers, Austin R; McLeod, Mary; Finer, Jonathan J; Hickey, Lauren A; Stout, Jennifer P; Fisher, Jule D; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmianus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Rubin, Joshua A; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; Kirby, John ‘Ce: Maier, Christina A ‘Subject: Re: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! Colleagues Pat From: Gerlach, Alec Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 06:14 PM ‘To: Kennedy, Patrick F; Evers, Austin R; McLeod, Mary; Finer, Jonathan J; Hickey, Lauren A; Stout, Jennifer P; Fisher, Jule O; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Rubin, Joshua A; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; Kirby, John Ce: Maier, Christina A ‘Subject: RE: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981139 Date: 05/31/2016C05981139FIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981139 Date: 05/31/2016 ] BS ‘When State Department officials first discovered that Hillary Rodham Clinton's personal email account contained classified information, they did not seize the thumb drive containing her digitally archived inbox but rather provided her attomey a special safe to secure the device, according to interviews and ‘documents. ‘The move allowed Mrs. Clinton's attomey to keep the device for several additional weeks while State officials reviewed paper copies of the emails for possible classified data, Eventually, the digital archive ‘was tured over to the FB! for examination this month. ‘And throughout the review process, career State officials who normally handle the release of data tnder the Freedom of Information Act ran into disagreements with lawyers about which information in ' the emails was classified, The Washington Times has leamed The disagreements are put of a complex, and at times tense, process in which career lawyers and career FOIA officials along with’a dozen intelligence review analysts from different agencies are trying to identify and protect intelligence information contained in Mrs. Clinton's personal email account. ' ‘The ongoing process has already flagged 60 of Mrs. Clinton's personal emails as containing classified” information at the “confidential” or “secret” level, although there's a debate raging over additional emails the intelligence community and career State officials believe contains more sensitive top-secret data, officials confirmed. ‘Amid the tensions, some career State employees have now alerted the intelligence community to irregularities that they fear may be part of a politcal effort to hide from the public the true extent of classified information that passed through her personal account, people familiar with the matter told ‘The Times. Their concerns inciude that one or more State Department lawyers involved in the production of the former secretary of state's emails to Congress and a federal court have ties to Mrs. Clinton’s private lawyer's firm, creating at least the perception intemally of a conflct of interest, sources told the Times, speaking only on condition of anonymity ‘The complaints were received by Intelligence Community Inspector General |. Charles McCollough I's office in recent weeks, and have been referred to the State Department's chief watchdog, the sources said, “ ‘The development opens up a potential new investigative front in a controversy that has already tamished Mrs. Clinton’s 2016 presidential bid. “At present, they (the career officials) have not formally sought whistleblower status but their disclosures are likely legally protected from retaliation since they involve matters affecting Congress, the courts and national security,” one of the sources directly familiar with the matter told the Times, ‘Since the revelation this spring that Mrs. Clinton had a private email server where she conducted some official business, the State Department has been busy reviewing ome 30,000 emails in that account for possible release to both the House Select Committee on Benghazi and a federal court handling a FOIA lawsuit. ‘State officials told the Times they are aware of tensions and disagreements during the extraordinary UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981139 Date: 05/31/2016C05981139%IED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981139 Date: 05/31/2016 review process, and State Department Inspector General Stephen Linick, the department's independent watchdog, is free to investigate any concerns raised by employees. They noted that Secretary of State John Kerry this spring, well before internal disputes arose, asked (Mr. Linick to review the department's security standards that allowed Mrs. Clinton to conduct official business on a private email account. “Secretary Kerry affirmatively asked for the State Department Inspector General to review the Department's records maintenance and FOIA processes and provide recommendations,” the deparment said in a statement to the Times. “As is customary, the IG’s review is entirely independent, and they are free to speak to any Department employees in the course of their work.” ‘Spokesmen for the State and Intelligence Community inspectors general declined to comment. State officials acknowledged that one extraordinary step taken by the department's leadership occurred in May when reviewing officials identified the first pieces of classified information inside Mrs. Clinton's personal email, At the time, State officials only had access to paper copies of the emails but were aware that Mrs, Clinton's personal attomiey, David Kendall, had an electronic copy of her email inbox in a .pst format stored on a thumb drive. The .pst format is commonly used for email programs like Microsoft Outlook. Rather than seize the thumb drive and tum it over to the intelligence community, State yielded to concems about violating Mrs. Clinton’s attorney-client privilege and instead provided a special secure safe capable of protecting classified information up to the “secret” level, officials confirmed to the Times. ‘That arrangement allowed Mr. Kendall to hold onto the electronic archive for several more weeks until the ongoing review flagged at least two emails containing possible top-secret information, the most sensitive of the nation's inteligence, officials acknowledged. ‘The most recent revelation about possible top-secret information finally prompted Mr. Kendall to turn over the thumb drive as well as the original email server's hard drive to the FBI in recent days. State officials said they were not concerned about leaving the device with Mr. Kendall in the safe they provided because they already paper copies of the emails, Mr. Kendall had a prior-issued security ‘Clearance and the emails were subject to court protective orders ensuring they couldn't be destroyed But career State and intelligence community officials found the arrangement with the safe to be highly unusual, ‘And it wasn't there only concern. ‘Memos released by the State inspector general show Patrick Kennedy, Undersecretary of State for management, has ‘refused the inteligence community's request to keep her stash of emails in a network for “Yop secret” material. ‘On the campaign tral over the weekend, Mrs. Cinton seemed to mock the inteligence community's concems over ‘securing documents. She quipped that she found a social media outlet that automatically made her messages disappear Career officials meanwhile ran into disagreements with lawyers from the department's legal counsel's office conceming which passages inside Mrs. Clinton's private emails should be declared classified in the FOIA lawsuit. ‘The career employees told the intelligence community some of the email passages they flagged fo be ‘exempted for release under FOIA as classified were altered during the legal review process to other UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981139 Date: 05/31/2016C05981139IED US. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981139 Date: 05/31/2016 ‘exemptions, such as “deliberative privilege,” according to sources familiar with the concerns. ‘The whistleblowers told the intelligence community they feared the changes were a deliberate effort to ~~ hide from the public the true extent of classified secrets that flowed through Mrs. Clinton's personal ‘email account and that they risked misleading the judge in the court case, sources said. State officials acknowledged to the Times that the multiple layers of review have resulted in different determinations about classification and occasional disagreements. State officials said the disagreements ran both ways between career lawyers and career FOIA officials. FOIA officials are concemed about issues related to their tasks, intelligence community analysts are worried about protecting their respective agency's secrets and the lawyers are worried about ensuring their representations to the courts are defensible, the officials said. "The IC is looking at this as needing to protect classified information. And the lawyers are looking at this as they have to defend to a judge why something was redacted from an email and kept from public release, especially the FOIA case goes to appeal. Those are different responsibilities that create ‘natural tensions," one official familiar with the process said, State officials said it may take weeks or months to resolve all the disputes, but the goal is to reach consensus eventually between the inteligence community and State's various layers of review. Officials said the department ultmately isn't trying to hide the extent to which classified information passed through Mrs. Clinton's private email account. They noted that while the media has focused on just a half dozen of Mrs, Clinton's personal emails containing secret intelligence, State's own internal review has already flagged 60 emails through July 30 containing classified data. And they expect that ‘number to rise before all 30,000 emails are reviewed. Of those first 60, nearly all contained classified secrets at the lowest level of "confidential" and one contained information at the intermediate level of “secret,” officials told the Times ‘And State officials are working with Mr, McCullough’s office to review two emails his team flagged as containing “top-secret” information derived from possible Pentagon satelites, drones or intercepts, ‘which is some of the nation’s most sensitive secrets. “Where ever the facts end up, that is where the determination will end,” one offical said, “The IGs have the independence to help us resolve these issues.” ‘The debate about the higher-level classified data is complicated by what is known as dual-source information, Dual-source information involves situations in which the intelligence community reports information through classified channels at the same time open sources like the news media disclose the same event, For instance, the Pentagon may report to State officials a drone strike killed a terrorist leader with the specifies of the location, the type of drone used and the intaligence that led to the strike while the news ‘media may report the drone strike and death based on an announcement of a foreign government or terror organization, Officials currently are reviewing the circumstances around the top-secret revelations to ensure no dual- source information was involved, the sources said Meanwhile, some of what is fueling career officials’ concerns is the apparent background of the lawyers involved in the email reviews for both Congress and the courts. The officials told the intelligence UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04846 Doc No. CO5981139 Date: 05/31/2016C05981139°IED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981139 Date: 05/31/2016 community they believe one or more of those lawyers previously worked at the Wiliams & Connolly law firm where Mrs. Clinton's lawyer, Mr. Kendall, is a senior partner. ‘A check of public records identified at least one State Department lawyer, Catherine “Kate” Duvall, who Previously worked at Williams & Connolly. A Politico profile identified Ms. Duval as having left Wiliams & Connolly to work for the Obama administration on the IRS targeting scandal before moving over to State in the last year. State officials confirmed to the Times that Ms. Duval has been working on Mrs. Clinton's emails but primarily n the capacity of helping to produce those that are relevant to the House Special Committee ‘on Benghazi. She is not part of the team of attorneys who is advising on legal matters involving the FOIA case. The officials said privacy laws prevented them from identifying any other lawyers inside their department who might previously have worked for Wiliams & Connolly but that they are confident none of the lawyers working on the email matter had any prior representation of Mrs. Clinton on personal ‘matters before they joined State. A for conflicts of interests, just working in the same law firm previously as Mrs. Clinton's lawyer isn't a legal disqualifier, officials noted. In the meantime, with tensions rising in Washington over the Clinton email scandal, the question of ‘whether the email production process involved political meddling or just differing bureaucratic responsibilities will fal for the time being on Mr. Linick, the State Department's internal watchdog. sBU This email is UNCLASSIFIED. From: Kennedy, Patrick F ‘Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 6:04 PM ‘To: Gerlach, Alec; Evers, Austin R; McLeod, Mary; Finer, Jonathan J; Hickey, Lauren A; Stout, Jennifer P; Fisher, Julie D; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Rubin, Joshua A; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; Kirby, John Ce: Maier, Christina A ‘Subject: Re: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! Colleagues UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981139 Date: 05/31/2016C059811395IED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04846 Doc No. C05981139 Date: 05/31/2016 ] BS Regards Pat From: Gerlach, Alec Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 05:39 PM ‘To: Evers, Austin R; McLeod, Mary; Finer, Jonathan J; Kennedy, Patrick F; Hickey, Lauren A; Stout, Jennifer P; Fisher, Jule D; deSree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Rubin, Joshua’A; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; Kirby, John Ce: Maier, Cristina A Subject: Re: 3:00 Meeting Today Friday)! Agree with this. ‘Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone. From: Evers, Austin R » Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 5:30 PM To: McLeod, Mary; Finer, Jonathan J; Kennedy, Patrick F; Hickey, Lauren A; Gerlach, Alec; Stout, Jennifer P; Fisher, Julie D; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Rubin, Joshua A; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T Ce: Maier, Christina A ‘Subject: RE: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! sBuU ‘This email is UNCLASSIFIED. From: McLeod, Mary Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 5:17 PM ‘To: Finer, Jonathan J; Evers, Austin R; Kennedy, Patrick F; Hickey, Lauren A; Gerlach, Alec; Stout, Jennifer P; Fisher, Julie D; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Rubin, Joshua’ A; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T . ‘Gc: Maier, Christina A : Subjects Re: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone. UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981139 Date: 05/31/2016C05981139FIED USS. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981139 Date: 05/31/2016 From: Finer, Jonathan 3 Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 5:14 PM To: Evers, Austin R; Kennedy, Patrick F; Hickey, Lauren A; Gerlach, Alec; Stout, Jenifer P; Fisher, Jule D; deBree, Mary L; Beechein, Stephanie; McLeod, Mary; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Rubin, Joshua A; Austin-Ferguson; Kathleen T. ‘Ce: Maier, Christina A Subject: Re: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! BS From: Evers, Austin R ‘Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 05:07 PM ‘To: Kennedy, Patrick F; Hickey, Lauren A; Finer, Jonathan J; Gerlach, Alec; Stout, Jennifer P; Fisher, Julie D; deBree, Mary L; Beechem,, Stephanie; McLeod, Mary; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C;, Rubin, Joshua A; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T Ce: Maier, Christina A Subject: RE: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! BU This email is UNCLASSIFIED. From: Kennedy, Patrick F ‘Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 4:51 PM To: Hickey, Lauren A; Finer, Jonathan J; Gerlach, Alec; Stout, Jennifer P; Fisher, Julie D; deBree, Mary L; ‘Beechem, Stephanie; McLeod, Mary; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Rubin, Joshua A; Evers, Austin R; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T Ce: Maier, Christina A ‘Subject: RE: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! Colleagues UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981139 Date: 05/31/2016C05981139FIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No, C05981139 Date: 05/31/2016 Regards pat From: Hickey, Lauren A ‘Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 4:47 PM To: Finer, Jonathan J; Gerlach, Alec; Kennedy, Patrick F; Stout, Jennifer P; Fisher, Julie D; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; McLeod, Mary; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph €; Toner, Mark C; Rubin, Joshua A; Evers, Austin R; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T Ce: Maier, Christina A ‘Subject: RE: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! sBU This email is UNCLASSIFIED. From: Finer, Jonathan } Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 4:11 PM To: Hickey, Lauren A; Gerlach, Alec; Kennedy, Patrick F; Stout, Jennifer P; Fisher, Julie D; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; McLeod, Mary; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Rubin, Joshua A; Evers, Austin R; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T Ce: Maier, Christina A Subject: Re: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! From: Hickey, Lauren A Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 03:58 PM To: Geriach, Alec; Kennedy, Patrick F; Stout, Jennifer P; Fisher, Jule D; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; McLeod, Mary; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Rubin, Joshua A; Evers, Austin R; Austin- Ferguson, Kathleen T; Finer, Jonathan J (Ce: Maier, Christina A . UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No, F-2015-04648 Doc No. C05981139 Date: 05/31/2016 BSC05981139FIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No, C05981139 Date: 05/31/2016 ‘Subject: RE: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! Lauren sBuU This email is UNCLASSIFIED. From: Gerlach, ‘Alec Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 1:15 PM To: Kennedy, Patrick F; Stout, Jennifer P; Fisher, Julie D; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; McLeod, Mary; Prosser, Sarah €; Macmanus, Joseph €; Toner, Mark C; Rubin, Joshua A; Evers, Austin R; Austin- Ferguson, Kathleen T; Finer, Jonathan J Ce: Maier, Christina A ‘Subject: RE: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981139 Date: 05/31/2016 BSC05981139FIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04848 Doc No. 05981139 Date: 05/31/2016 sau , This email is UNCLASSIFIED. From: Kennedy, Patrick F ‘Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 12:54 PM ‘To: Geriach, Alec; Stout, Jennifer P; Fisher, Julie D; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; McLeod, Mary; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Duval, Catherine S; Rubin, Joshua. Evers, Austin R; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; Finer, Jonathan J (Ce: Maier, Christina A ‘Subject: Re: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! * Colleagues BS UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No, C05981139 Date: 05/31/2016C05981139FIED US. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04846 Doc No. C05981139 Date: 05/31/2016 BS Regards Pat From: Gerlach, Alec ‘Sent: Sunday, August 16, 2015 09:45 AM To: Stout, Jennifer P; Kennedy, Patrick F; Fisher, Julie D; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; McLeod, Mary; Prosser, Sarah €; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Duval, Catherine S; Rubin, Joshua A; Evers, Austin R; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; Finer, Jonathan J Subject: Re: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! When State Department officials first discovered that Hillary Rodham Clinton's personal email account contained classified information, they did not seize the thumb drive containing her digitally archived inbox but rather provided a special safe that allowed her attorney to securely keep the materials from the inteligence community for several more weeks, according to interviews and documents. ‘And throughout the review process, career State officials who normally handle the release of data under the Freedom of Information Act ran into opposition from lawyers who disagreed with some of their determinations that information in the emails was classified, The Washington Times has learned. ‘The ongoing process has already flagged 60 of Mrs. Clinton's personal emails for containing classified information at the “confidential” or “secret” level, although there's a debate raging over additional emails the intelligence community and career workers believe contains more sensitive top-secret data, officials confirmed, ‘Amid the tensions, some career State employees have now alerted the intelligence community to iregularities that they fear may be part of a political effort to hide from the public the true extent of Glassified information that passed through her personal account, people familiar with the matter told ‘The Washington Times. ‘Their concems include that one or more State Department lawyers involved in the production of the former secretary of state's emails to Congress and a federal court have ties to Mrs. Clinton's private lawyers firm, creating at least the perception intemally of a confit of interest, sources told the Times, speaking only on condition of anonymity, ‘The complaints were received by Intelligence Community inspector General |. Charles McCullough lil's office in recent weeks, and have been referred to the State Department's chief watchdog, the sources said, ‘The development opens up a potential new investigative front in a controversy that has already UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646. Doc No. C05981139 Date: 05/31/2016C05981139)FIED US. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04648 Doc No. C05981139 Date: 05/31/2016 tamished Mrs. Clinton's 2016 presidential bid. “At present, they (the career officials) have not formally sought whistleblower status but their disclosures are likely legally protected from retaliation since they involve matters affecting Congress, the courts and national security,” one of the sources directly familiar with the matter told the Times. ‘Since the revelation this spring that Mrs. Clinton had a private email server where she conducted some official business, the State Department has been busy reviewing some 30,000 emails in that account fot poss release to bom te House Select Commitee on Benghaz anda feera court handing & 8 lawsuit State officials told the Times they are aware of tensions and disagreements during the extraordinary review process and are content to let State Inspector General Stephen Linick, the department's independent watchdog, take the lead in resolving them. ‘They noted that Secretary of State John Kerry this spring, well before internal disputes arose, asked Mr. Linick to review the department's security standards that allowed Mrs. Clinton to conduct official business on a private email account. “Secretary Kerry affirmatively asked for the State Department inspector General to review the Department's records maintenance and FOIA processes and provide recommendations,” the department said in a statement to the Times. “As is customary, the IG's review is entirely independent, and they are free to speak to any Department employees in the course of their work.” State officials acknowledged that one extraordinary step taken by the department's leadership occurred in May when reviewing officials identified the first pieces of classified information inside Mrs. Clinton's personal email. At the time, State officials only had access to paper copies of the emails but were aware that Mrs. Clinton's personal attorney, David Kendall, had an electronic copy of her email inbox in a .pst format stored on a thumb drive, The .pst format is commonly used for email programs like Microsoft Outlook. Rather than seize the thumb drive and turn it over to the intelligence community, State yielded to concems about violating Mrs. Clinton’s attorney-client privilege and instead provided a special secure ‘safe capable of protecting classified information up to the “secret” level, officials confirmed to the Times. ‘That arrangement allowed Mr. Kendall to keep the electronic archive from the intelligence community for several more weeks unti the ongoing review flagged at least two emails containing possible top- secret information, the most sensitive of the nation’s intelligence, officials acknowledged. ‘The most recent revelation about possible top-secret information finally prompted Mr. Keindall to tum over the thumb drive as well as the original email server's hard drive to the FBI in recent days While career officials found the arrangement with the safe to be unusual, they also ran into disagreements with lawyers from the department's legal counsel's office conceming which passages inside Mrs, Clinton's private emaiis should be declared classified in the FOIA lawsuit. ‘The career employees told the intelligence community some of the email passages they flagged to be exempted for release under FOIA as classified were altered during the legal review process to other ‘exemptions, such as "deliberative privilege," according to sources familiar with the concerns, ‘The whistleblowers told the intelligence community they feared the changes were a deliberate effort to hide from the public the true extent of classified secrets that flowed through Mrs. Clinton's personal ‘email account and that they risked misleading the judge in the court case, sources said. UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981139 Date: 05/31/2016C05981139FIED US. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04848 Doc No. C05981139 Date: 05/31/2016 ‘State officials acknowledged to the Times that the multiple layers of review have resulted in different determinations about classification, in part because lawyers are concerned about what is known in the intelligence world as *dual-source” information. ‘Dual source information involves situations in which the intelligence community reports information through classified channels at the same time open sources like the news media disclose the same event. For instance, the Pentagon may report to State officials a drone strike killed a terrorist leader with the specifics of the location, the type of drone used and the intelligence that led to the strike while the news ‘media may report the drone strike and death based on an announcement of a foreign government or terror organization, After FOIA officials first flag information in Mrs. Clinton’s personal email as existing inside the nation’s Classified intelligence system, the lawyers have tried to determine whether the information may also have come from public sources, officials explained to the Ties. Complicating the review process is the fact that some of the disputed emails in Mrs. Clinton's private inbox came ftom State officials who sent information via their official accounts, where classified information is supposed to be automatically lagged as such before itis sent or is blocked from being sent to external addresses because it includes national secrets, the officials said “The IC is looking at this as needing to protect ciassified information. And the lawyers are looking at this as they have to defend to a judge why something was redacted from an email and kept from public release, especially if the FOIA case goes to appeal. Those are different responsibilities that create ‘natural tensions,” one official familiar with the process said “IFIC flags a passage as classified and the lawyers later find that that information came through the official system unmarked (as classified) and there was public source information on the same subject, they are likely going to be reluctant to try to argue to a judge that the classification exemption applies,” the official explained. . State officials said it may take weeks or months to resolve all the disputes but the goal is to reach ‘consensus eventually between the intelligence community and State's various layers of review. “The officials said the department ultimately isnt trying to hide the extent to which classified information passed through Mrs. Ciinton’s private email account. They noted that while the media has focused on just a half dozen of Ms. Clinton's personal emails containing secret inteligence, State's own internal review has already flagged 80 emails through July 30 containing classified data. And they expect that ‘number to rise before all 30,000 emails are reviewed. Of those first 60, nearly all contained classified secrets at the lowest level of “confidential” and one Contained information at the intermediate level of “secret,” officials told the Times. And State officials are working with Mr. McCollough's office two review two emails his team flagged as containing “top- secret” information derived from possible Pentagon satellites, drones of intercepts, which is some of the nation's most sensitive secrets. “Where ever the facts end up, that is where the determination will end,” one official said. “The IGs have the independence to help us resolve these issues.” Meanwhile, some of what is fueling career officials’ concems is the apparent background of the lawyers involved in the email reviews for both Congress and the courts. The officials told the intelligence ‘community they believe one or more of those lawyers previously worked at the Wiliams & Connolly law firm where Mrs. Clinton's lawyer, Mr. Kendall, is @ senior partner. UNCLASSIFIED U.S, Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981139 Date: 05/31/2016C05981139FIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981139 Date: 05/31/2016 ‘A check of public records identified at least one State Department lawyer, Catherine “Kate” Duval, who previously worked at Williams & Connolly. A Politico profile identified Ms. Duval as having left Williams ‘& Connolly to work for the Obama administration on the IRS targeting scandal before moving over to State in the last year. ‘State officials confirmed to the Times that Ms, Duval has been working on Mrs. Clinton's emails but solely in the capacity of helping to produce those that are relevant to the House Special Committee on Benghazi. She has no role in determining what should be exempted from FOIA.documents as Classified, the officials stressed, . The officials said privacy laws prevented them from identifying any other lawyers inside their department who might previously have worked for Willams & Connolly but that they are confident none ofthe lawyers working on the email matter had any role in prior representation of Mrs. Clinton on Personal matters. In the meantime, with tensions rising in Washington over the Clinton email scandal, the question of whether the email production process involved political funny business or just differing bureaucratic responsibilities will fall for the time being on Mr. Linick, the State Department's intemal watchdog. Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone. From: Stout, Jennifer P Sent: Friday, August 14, 2015 8:43 PM, ‘To: Gerlach, Alec; Kennedy, Patrick F; Fisher, Julie D; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; McLeod, Mary; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Duval, Catherine S; Rubin, Joshua A; Evers, Austin R; Austin-Ferguson, Kathieen T; Finer, Jonathan ‘Subject: RE: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! ‘Thanks Alec, Lauren and Stephanie for the hard work on this today. From: Geriach, Alec Sent: Friday, August 14, 2015 7:49 PM To: Stout, Jennifer P; Kennedy, Patrick F; Fisher, ule D; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; McLeod, Mary; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Duval, Catherine S; Rubin, Joshua A; Evers, Austin R; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; Finer, Jonathan J Subject: RE: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! ‘Thanks for quick responses today. I've sent along our response, and we'll Keep you up to speed over the weekend as we hear back. This email is UNCLASSIFIED. From: Stout, Jennifer P Sent: Friday, August 14, 2015 7:07 PM To: Kennedy, Patrick F; Gerlach, Alec; Fisher, Julie D; deBree, Mary L; Beecher, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; McLeod, Mary; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Duval, Catherine S; Rubin, Joshua A; Evers, Austin R; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; Finer, Jonathan 3 ‘Subject: RE: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! Good here as well. Thank you. UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981139 Date: 05/31/2016C05981139FIED US. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981139 Date: 05/31/2016 From: Kennedy, Patrick F Sent: Friday, August 14, 2015 6:53 PM To: Gerlach, Alec; Fisher, Julie D; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; McLeod, Mary; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Duval, Catherine S; Rubin, Joshua A; Evers, Austin R; Stout, Jennifer P; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T Subject: RE: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! (Ok for Austin-Ferguson and Kennedy From: Gerlach, Alec Sent: Friday, August 14, 2015 6:44 PM To: Fisher, Julie D; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; McLeod, Mary; Kennedy, Patrick F; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Duval, Catherine S; Rubin, Joshua A; Evers, Austin R; Stout, Jennifer P; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T ‘Subject: RE: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! BS UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No, C05981139 Date: 05/31/2016C05981139°IED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981139 Date: 05/31/2016 | | BS sBu ‘This email is UNCLASSIFIED. . . From: Fisher, Julie D Sent: Friday, August 14, 2015 6:15 PM 5 To: Gerlach, Alec; deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; McLeod, Mary; Kennedy, Patrick F; Prosser, Sarah E; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Duval, Catherine S; Rubin, Joshua A; Evers, Austin Rj Stout, Jennifer P; Austn-Ferguson, Kathleen T Subject: RE: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981139 Date: 05/31/2016C05981139FIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No, C05981139 Date: 05/31/2016 Clear for D-MR. From: Gerlach, Alec ‘Sent: Friday, August 14, 2015 4:25 PM To: deBree, Mary L; Beechem, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; McLeod, Mary; Kennedy, Patrick F; Prosser, Sarah E; Fisher, Julie 0; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Duval, Catherine S; Rubin, Joshua A; Evers, Austin R; Stout, I Jennifer P; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T ‘Subject: RE: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! BS UNCLASSIFIED U.S, Department of State Case No. F-2015-04648 Doc No. C05981139 Date: 05/31/2016C05981139/FIED US. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04648 Doc No. C05981139 Date: 05/31/2016 sBu This email is UNCLASSIFIED. From: deBree, Mary L Sent: Friday, August 14, 2015 2:11 PM To: Gerlach, ‘Alec; Beechem, Stephanie; Hickey, Lauren A; McLeod, Mary; Kennedy, Patrick F; Prosser, Sarah E; Fisher, Jule’D; Macmanus, Joseph E; Toner, Mark C; Duval, Catherine S; Evers, Austin R; Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T Cc: Rubin, Joshua A; Bieber, Wendy M; Stout, Jennifer P; Smith, Brenda B; Cost, Lydia A; Helton-Floyd, Kathleen L ‘Subject: 3:00 Meeting Today (Friday)! Importance: High HAN Jen would like to have a meeting today at 3:00 in the $ Conference room re: FOIA. Please let me know if ‘you will not be able to join for the meeting today. Thank you Mary. Horie ote Seeary Sposa Adraoe 202.647.5548 debreemi@state gow UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04648 Doc No. C05981139 Date: 05/31/2016 BSC05981141'IED U.S. Department of State Case No, F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981141 Date: 05/31/2016 ‘McLeod, Mary Ser Wednesday, March 4, 2015 10:47 PM. * To Visek, Richard C Subject: Re: 3/4 State Dept. Press Briefing ~ Marie Harf | No comment. | ‘From: Visek, Richard C ‘Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2015 10:26 PM RELEASE IN PART 85) To: McLeod, Mary ‘Subject: FW: 3/4 State Dept. Press Briefing - Marie Harf fyi From: Harf, Marie E ‘Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2015 9:42 PM. To: Visek, Richard C; Beechem, Stephanie; Gerach, Alec Cc: Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T Subject: Re: 3/4 State Dept, Press Briefing ~ Marie Hart (Ok. Happy to chat. From: Visek, Richard C Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2015 09:40 PM | To: Hart, Marie E; Beechem, Stephanie; Gerlach, Alec wustin-Ferguson, Kathleen T Subject: RE: 3/4 State Dept. Press Briefing ~~ Marie Harf BS From: Harf, Marie E Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2015 9:39 PM isek, Richard C; Beechem, Stephanie; Gerlach, Alec Ce: Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T ‘Subject: Re: 3/4 State Dept. Press Briefing -~- Marie Harf From: Visek, Richard C ‘Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2015 08:35 PM ‘To: Beechem, Stephanie; Gerlach, Alec; Hart, Marie E Ce: Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T ‘Subject: RE: 3/4 State Dept. Press Briefing ~ Marie Hart (REVIEW AUTHORITY: Paul Blackburn, Senior Reviewer, UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No, F-2015-04846 Doc No. C05981141 Date: 05/31/2016C05981141IED USS. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No, C05981141 Date: 05/31/2016 BS Ld From: Beechem, Stephanie Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2015 3:44 PM ‘To: Austin-Ferguson, Kathleen T; Bair, James P; Cooper, Susannah E; Duval, Catherine S; Evers, Austin R; Fallon, Robert M; Frantz, Douglas; Frifield, Julia E; Gerlach, Alec; Harf, Marie E; Harris, Katherine A; Hickey, Lauren A; Krekemeier, Chad; Leventhal, Brian H; MacDonald, Andrew T; Maier, Christina A; Sullivan, Thomas D; Visek, Richard C; Vaddi, Pranay R; Lyons, Michele R ‘Subject: 3/4 State Dept. Press Briefing ~ Marie Harf Here’s relevant discussion at today’s briefing, ‘State Department Briefing with Deputy Spokesperson Marie Harf ‘March 4, 2015 03:37PM ET | Federal News Service State Department Bnefing wth Deputy Spokesperson Mare Hart ‘Subject: Dally Press Briefing Location: Briefing Room, the State Department, Washington, D.C. Time: 13:00:00 Date: 2015-03- of ta ‘QUESTION: To touch on what we spoke about yesterday regarding former Secretary of State Cinton's emails, HARF: Yes. ‘QUESTION: | just wanted to ~ you know, at the time, you sald you werertt sure about how the whole thing got setup. And | asked. HARF: How important (inaudible)? QUESTION: Well, how ~ you know, did she ever have a State erail, was it offered, was i rejected? Also wanted to ask about ‘2 repor that there were some red flags raised atthe time herein the bulging HARE: Mm-hemm, ‘QUESTION: Butt never went any further. Itnever reached her, because * was deemed to be appropriate or acceptable HARF: Sure. And a couple points and wil answer all of your questions; | promise, And then Im sure there willbe many more. “There's been 3 couple of inaccurate accounts over the last 24 hours, some that | think you asked about but some others. So! just want to clear those up, and then lets get into species, First, there's an inaceurate account that Secretary Clinton used multple accounts. That i false, There was just one email ‘accounts. Thats false, There was just one e-mail account, ‘Second, t wasnt the select committe that brought this e-mail account to gt, although ! think some have tned to claim that. Infact, the accounts existence had been known publicly since March 2013, when t was reported on ‘And, of course, there's — as we've sa yesterday, 8 was nat prohibited at the time, is not prohibited now. And we can get into ‘more details about that : In terms of the questions about when twas set up and allo that, you know, 'm sure her office can address some of that We're not gonna get into specifics, but this was the e-mail account thet she used, |1cant speek to anonymous claims about, you know, concems people inside the building may have raised. Again, | thnk her UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981141 Date: 05/31/2016C05981141FIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981141 Date: 05/31/2016 office can address te sues about secuy. | think thee probably met appropiate todo to So cant realy speak those ings of claims. QUESTION: Anonymous or no, | mean, have you asked the cyber secury ofc here inthe State Deparment hey hag HARE: have not. fm. (CROSSTALK) QUESTION: Has anyone askec about that? HAR: Im happy to heck on tht. QUESTION: Thank you ARF: im happy to check on that And, its ot prohibited. Was not then, isnot now. So just want fo reinforce that. Yes? QUESTION: (inaudible) some clarty on who exactly in this building is in charge Of handing compliance with regards to archiving of electronic communications? HARF: Im happy to check on — 'm not - currently fm not sure. QUESTION: Do you know f anyone in whatever that department was had raised any concems atthe time that she was serving as secretary? |HARF: Well, not knowing what department tha is, | think & would be hard for me to know what concerns they raised. But m happy to chock QUESTION: There's ~ you referenced yesterday the 2013 guidance trom NARA (ph), Dutt also seems that there's an August 2012 guidance om Offce of Management and Budget directing al federal agences to ~ get the language ight ~"Wo create ‘records management systems that ensure compliance with federal records" “federal records management statutes and regulations,” spectfealy referencing the president's memorandum fn 2011. Atthat time, did anyone raise the issue of whether this was in compliance? LHARF: Well again | think what you naticed witn the 2009, 2011, you just mentioned 2012, that there was clearly an ongoing ‘need for clarty about how all of the government agencies Kept records, And f was tre then, certainly when she was secretary hat, a, there was nota prohibition on using personal e-mall, but, b, there was also not atime requirement for when your personal e-mais or documents, wrt large, had tobe preserved as part ofthe record, Tags since change bt tat was arse ‘So, at the time, there was no time requirement. Those $5,000 documents which her staff has sald is anything related to her ‘work was turned over. So her staff has sald that is everything, tt has now been given to the State Department and are pat of ‘he permanent recor ‘QUESTION’ 1 quess (inaudible) what m tying to get at here Is was anyone actively montoring whether the State Department ‘atthat ime was in compliance with these directives? |HARF: Im happy to check. But, when we talk about compliance, even those directives that you mentioned when she wes ‘secretary dd not include atime requirement to turn over records as part of @ permanent record. So while | cant speak to the specifics, | do know that at that time, there was no time requirement 7 "Now there is, and s has given everything, according to her staf, to the State Department. QUESTION: And then one follow UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04648 Doc No. C05981141 Date: 05/31/2016|CO5981141FIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981141 Date: 05/31/2016 ‘up question from yesterday: Do you have anything further on whether there's gonna be a comprehensive review ofthe rents ofthese eras or on how ts thal youve reached the ~ the | guess deision hat tere was no csssifed information included In them? |HARF: Well, and obviously = and part ofthis is coming up because 200 of her e-mails were provided tothe select committee, ‘30 somebody obviously hac to go through all §5,000 pages to determine there was anything tat was deemed responsive the select committee's request. So that process for that request was undertaken. {totner requests come in inthe future, they willbe gone through as wel! see if there's anything responsive and approprate tobe provided | you know, she and her team have sai that twas not used for anything but unclassified work. You know, we dont undergo ‘sean of everyone's unciassifed email to make sure tey'e only dong uneisesified work, $0, | dont think there was ny indeation she was doing anything but here. So, | dont think realy a pertinent question. QUESTION: But you cant claim dettvely that there wee nothing classified in there. HARF: You cant cla that about anyone's unclassifes ema ‘QUESTION: Right. HARP: So, tm not sure why this would be anything diferent - ‘She has said ~her tam has sad she only dd — I dont knaw why thie would be helé to atferent standard, QUESTION Its citferent because its @ cabinet member using an uncissifed emai. And most people. HARE: But we all use unclassifed emai Would tbe aiterentitsne QUESTION: But most peopl use most of thelr workis on @ work ema HARE: Buton the work email thats not scanned fo assed formation eter, rad. "she hag hed @ state.gov email, there wouldn't have been a classification review to make sure everything on that emall was uneassined, QUESTION: Understand, HARF: Great. QUESTION: But would have the securty in place to handle classified material? HARE: Absolutely not. Thats patently false. An unciassiied email system at the State Department does not have security to handle classified Information ‘QUESTION: But we werent tang about an unclassified. She would ~ she would have a clssies capac inher eri ro? ARF: No, no, no, The classified (inaulble) system, even at state.gov, no, no wat. This i QUESTION: We'e spiting has hore, HARE: No we're not. We are actually not. | have both. can tell you. There are two separate work machines. They are two separate systems that anyone can have -- you know, peope who heve unclasafed emai here, those arent scanned for fassed information, and they ae nt ~ they are not St upto, fom a securty perspective, nandleclssiiedineration ey 8 not UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981141 Date: 05/31/20160598114 1°IED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981141 Date: 05/31/2016 ‘QUESTION: But youre saying she di not have a classed or an uncassifed ema at he State Department. Is that coneet? HARF: Yes, o,yes. QUESTION: So presumably, if she had done her business at he State Department, she coulcVve used a classed email system. No? | mean, that woulgVe been available to her. [HARF: In theory, but she had other ways of communicating through classified email through her assistants or her staf, with people, when she needed to use a classified setting What | was saying is, our unclassified email systems at the State Department are not the same system as the classified, and they aren equppe om seen ampere eet ton, een fay seta. acount oe So, must, you know, we all use unclass systems. They dont have classiied on them, ‘QUESTION: OK, HARE: not QUESTION: | mean, her question wasn't pertinent to unclassified email at state. HARF: Was not pertinent? I'm sory, think ‘we're tying each other up in knots. | wil answer the question, Im just not sure we ~ did | get? 'm sory, let's stay with {QUESTION tink hat hat goto, but fm tia ite uncer. HARE: As to what? QUESTION: Maybe we can — someone else can asa question and we can gt back o me HARE: OK. If thre are things that arnt lar, tm happy tty to adress them. QUESTION: Yesterday, you weren't ready to confirm that all her emails were now in the State Departments possessions. Now you're prety confident about that? ARF: What im saying is her staff has sated that anything related to her work has been given to the State Department ‘QUESTION: OK HARE: So ‘QUESTION: And you have no reason to doubt that. HARF: Exacty, ut, you know, this is obviously a confirmation her stat has to make. QUESTION: OK ‘QUESTION: Can we. y UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981141 Date: 05/31/2016C05981141IED US. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981141 Date: 05/31/2016 HARE: Anything else? ta QUESTION: Sorry, going back to Clinton for HARE: Mm-henm, QUESTION: So, one of the arguments presented was that in genera, former secretary would be using — even using @ ‘personal email would be communicating to people who had e government email address. HARE: In a vast majority of those 66,000 pages were to other state gov addresses, to or from. QUESTION: Two of her closest aides, its been reported, had ther own personal emi accounts. Ané I's been suggested that Cone of the reasons why FOIA requests tothe State Department were rejected was because their communication dd not fll Under State Departments purview. HARE: Its my understanding that one of th Fa point you to her certainly, and we have former employees is addressing this — seems to be addressing that himselt. So to address that. But again, a vast majorty of her emails were to and from the State gov address, of them now and they aré a part of our permanent record QUESTION: So that communication did not violate any regulation a far as her not forwarding that on o HAR: Correct. QUESTION. the State Deparment. HARE: There was no prohibition. And there was not then anther It net now a protition on using a personal emai for official business. And at the ime she was in office, there at no time requrement or when hore needed tobe preserved as Fecord. They all have been preserved as records now. Her team has sad that ths isthe extent ofthe records that she has, So that is where we are today. QUESTION: OK, s0| just want to repeat (ph), $0 those records would not include @ personal ema to a personal ema ‘count? HARP: The 55,000 that we have today, absolutely would, QUESTION: They would incude that? HARF: Correct. What we were saying was before the 55,000 pages were turned over tothe State Department, anything to and from a State gov address would already have been pert of our record, nght? So those already would have been part ofthe record. “The entire 55,000, those two and from State gov and those two other people that werent State gov are now all part four record, because she has turned them over. QUESTION: And they have this practice, give thal, ou know, its 27 months since she's been secretary — 28 months since ‘he's been Secretary of State. And now you're saying you have everything, but youre confring that a FOIA in her ~ over her entice duration, plus the last two years and two months wouldrtt have gotten these documents? They would have just slipped through. Is that ~ you dort see that as problematic? ARF: Unless they were to a State.gov — to or from a State gov address, ‘QUESTION: Right But these ones that would have been outside would just have... ARF: Right, QUESTION... never come under anyone's purview or anyone's oversight or anyone's — just — it would have fallen through the racks. UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981141 Date: 05/31/2016C05981141IED US. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981141 Date: 05/31/2016 HARP: For the small numbers that werent. ‘QUESTION: Do you thik that's problematic? HARE: Every FOIA request and congressional request we get going forward will obviously include these. And that's what we re working Very hereto do, And that's wy forthe Select Committe, we've already provised them with 300 emails from this batch, ‘And | would also note in August 2012, when we sent a batch of documents to the Select Commitee, that inckided eral it included email that included her emai on that. So Congress has known about this email address for qute some tne, QUESTION: But even broader than the Benghazi Select Comittee, | mean. journalists or members ofthe public who fled FOIA requests, there would have been. HARF: Correct QUESTION: .. a section of emails that ust never would have possibly gotten to them, even i they were pertinent to that request? HARF: And now they are able tobe par of FOIA, i they re deemed tobe responsive ‘QUESTION: Right. But do you thnk that. HARF: Not every emeilis automaticaly released or deemed responsive, QUESTION: Right, rant HARP. toa request, as you know. ‘QUESTION: But do you think that that's problematic that forthe last six years, essentially, there's been a small section of ‘emails that would have been cut out and ther perience would never have been examined. HARF. Wel there was no ‘rohibition on this practice. So 'm not going to make a judgment about appropriateness or not 'mteling you what the ‘regulations say and dont say. She operated under them and tats as much as |can say. QUESTION: Iteverybody had done this, would — what would that have meant forthe FOIA system and for getting relevant ‘information HARF: | dot think tm going to make broad or sweeping generalizations about FOIA But | wil say we have provided tens of thousands of documents to Congress on a variety of issues. I mean, ifs just on Benghazi tons of thousands of documents ‘But nothing, | would also say that nothing we have seen in — for example, in her emails about Senghaz! the 300, that were responsive the Committee that changes the record or the facts about what happened, which | do think isan important pot. Its not the answer fo your question, butts an Important point. QUESTION: Right Sure HARE: Yep. Yes. ‘QUESTION: UAE? HARE: Anything else onthe emails? QUESTION: Technically a clarification. Ce is that aid tose emais just get transterred or did she give the password or you ‘now, t's on a separate server as — have been — i's not on Gmail server ora State Departments 8 completely separate server, so there are passwords and so on, So is there a kind ofa fiteing that has been done? HARE: Well, what server ison doesn't matter. The requirement is that all records she has be turned over tothe State Department o be part ofthe permanent record. Her staff has stated that anything she had related to her work has been given to the State Department UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-04646 Doc No. C05981141 Date: 05/31/2016