State Department Not Troubled By Presence of Sensitive Material on Hillary’s Private Server

LEE: “Despite the fact that this information was not, as you say, classified at the time –“

HARF: “Correct.”

LEE: “-- it was sent to her –“

HARF: “Correct.”

LEE: “-- is it at all troubling or problematic for the Department that this kind of information, which is clearly sensitive, even if it wasn’t classified at the time, was being passed around on a private server?”

HARF: “Well, I think we’ve spoken more broadly to this issue in the past, in terms of the fact that there was no prohibition from using private email as a public official. We’ve spoken about this in the past. I don’t have much more to add than that. I would again note that this information was not classified at the time.”

LEE: “Was it – what was it considered at the time? Do you know?”

HARF: “Unclassified.”

LEE: “But not even, like, sensitive but unclassified?

HARF: “It had no markings on it.”

LEE: “It had no –“

HARF: “And again, when it got sent to the Hill, it also went in an unclassified form. This – again, as part of the FOIA process, this happens about several times a month on average where, for a variety of reasons under the FOIA law, something that has been previously unclassified is for public release deemed to be classified.”

LEE: “Last one from me on this. When did – when was it that the FBI asked for this to be upgraded?”

HARF: “Well, there’s been an ongoing interagency process. Every agency that has equities in these emails has at some point in the review process – is part of it, as will be the case with the 55,000.”

LEE: “So some time in –“

HARF: “So there’s been an ongoing discussion with the other agencies throughout the last several weeks that we’ve been doing this.”

LEE: “But is that since they were turned over to the committee, or since it became public knowledge that there was the – that this private server existed?”

HARF: “Right. So there – when they – they went through an interagency process when they went to the committee as well, but using the standards of going to members of Congress who have clearances, not using FOIA standards. So when we made the decision to release these publicly under FOIA standards, a new interagency process started. So we can work backwards; I’m sorry, I don’t remember the date. But when we decided to release all of them publicly, we started the new FOIA process, which is a separate process with different standards for public release. They went back to the interagency then, and that’s when all of these discussions took place.”

LEE: “All right. Then just remind me: Did you guys decide to make all of these public – it was only after it became public knowledge – of the private server became public knowledge –“

HARF: “No.”

LEE: “-- that you decided to release them all, right?”

HARF: “It was when – well, I can go back and look at the chronology. It’s – when she turned them all over to us, I think we very quickly said – even before the server issue was discussed, if I remember correctly – that we would undertake using FOIA standards review to release these publicly. On Tuesday we’ll be making a court filing, following up on ours last week, I think, on the 55,000, outlining a – how we will be undertaking rolling production – so periodic production of the remaining 55,000. And that’s something we’re committed to.”