Two federal inspectors general have asked the Justice Department to open a criminal investigation into the possible mishandling of classified information by Hillary Clinton through he use of a private email server while she was Secretary of State, the New York Times is reporting.
The IG’s found that her private account contained “hundreds of potentially classified emails,” according to the Times.
Ah yes, a candidate running for president while under criminal investigation. It could only be a Clinton.
From the Times:
It is not clear if any of the information in the emails was marked as classified by the State Department when Mrs. Clinton sent or received them. But since her use of a private email account for official State Department business was revealed in March, she has repeatedly said that she had no classified information on the account.
How does she know she didn’t send classified information? Did she vet emails before sending them? Sounds a little time consuming.
This is what you get with the Clintons: ethically challenged, potentially criminal, affirmatively sleazy standard operating procedures.
Meantime, Politico has a great story about how the New York Times actually changed the wording in the story after the Clinton camp went ballistic:
The paper initially reported that two inspectors general have asked the Justice Department to open a criminal investigation “into whether Hillary Rodham Clinton mishandled sensitive government information on a private email account she used as secretary of state.”
That clause, which cast Clinton as the target of the potential criminal probe, was later changed: the inspectors general now were asking for an inquiry “into whether sensitive government information was mishandled in connection with the personal email account Hillary Rodham Clinton used as secretary of state.”
The Times also changed the headline of the story, from “Criminal Inquiry Sought in Hillary Clinton’s Use of Email” to “Criminal Inquiry Is Sought in Clinton Email Account,” reflecting a similar recasting of Clinton’s possible role. The article’s URL was also changed to reflect the new headline.
But I don’t understand the justification for the change, other than that it’s really unpleasant to have Hillary’s goons screaming at you in the middle of the night.
If she’s not the target of the investigation, who exactly is? The server itself? Can you send an email server to prison? Would it care?