Judicial Watch: New Clinton Emails Produced by State Department; Clinton Email Shows She Was Concerned About Records
JUNE 27, 2016
(Washington DC) – Judicial Watch today released 165 pages of new State Department records that include a previously unreleased March 22, 2009, email of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton revealing that she was concerned about how her records were being handled and had “no idea how my papers are treated at State. Who manages both my personal and official files?” Clinton top aide Huma Abedin responds: “We’ve discussed this” and promises to explain it again. This is the fifth set of records produced to Judicial Watch by the State Department (from the non-“state.gov” email accounts of Huma Abedin) that contain Hillary Clinton emails that were not produced by the State Department as part of the 55,000 pages of emails that Hillary Clinton turned over to the State Department.
These records further appear to contradict statements by Clinton that, “as far as she knew,” all of her government emails were turned over to the State Department even though she turned over no emails dated prior to March 18, 2009. These new records release contain 34 new @clintonemail.com emails that have not been previously produced by to the State Department.
The documents were produced under court order in a May 5, 2015, Freedom of Information (FOIA) lawsuit against the State Department (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:15-cv-00684)) for “all emails of official State Department business received or sent by former Deputy Chief of Staff Huma Abedin from January 1, 2009 through February 1, 2013 using a non-“state.gov” email address.”
In the March 2009 Clinton email exchange with Abedin and Lauren Jiloty, former special assistant to Clinton, concerning “how my papers are being treated at State,” Clinton urges that they “design a system” and “get on this asap:”
Dear Lauren and Huma—
I have just realized I have no idea how my papers are treated at State. Who manages both my personal and official files?
I am sending out material the way I did w Lauren in the Senate, but I don’t know what’s happening w it all. For instance, I’ve sent a few things to Cheryl but she says she hasn’t read them. Does Claire manage this or does it all go to Joe? Are there personal files as well as official ones set up? If I don’t write anything on paper – as I mostly don’t – Lauren knew how to file it all in the Senate. I’m sending out a mix which sometimes Claire and other times Lauren picks up from the out box. What happens then is a mystery to me!
So, I think we need to get on this asap to be sure we know and design the system we want. Let me know what you both think. Thx.
From: Huma Abedin
Sent: Sunday, March 22, 2009 11:57 AM
To: email@example.com, JilotyLC@state.gov
Subject: Re: Follow up
We’ve discussed this. I can explain it to you when I see u today.
The new documents also include a March 23, 2009, email exchange between then-State Department Official Corley Kenna and former Clinton Chief of Staff Cheryl Mills, containing the political contribution history of Judith Heumann. The contribution history contains five separate contributions to the presidential campaigns of Clinton and Barack Obama. According to the documents, Mills forwarded the email exchange directly to Clinton. In 2010, Heumann was appointed as the State Department Special Advisor on Disability Rights.
The new emails also show new communications between Clinton Foundation advisers (including Douglas Band), Abedin, and Clinton about the Middle East, and a Haiti “donors” conference. The emails show that Clinton wanted to collect positive comments about her tenure to give to the press reporting on her first 100 days in office. The emails also show that Clinton tried to obtain a job at State for the son of former British Prime Minister Tony Blair.
And a March 21, 2009, email from a sender whose name seems to have been kept secret contains explicit instructions to Clinton and Mills on how to handle a State Department “team meeting” that is to occur the following day. Clinton is advised to create the “perception” that “you are interested and engaged … that you are listening and that you are watching.” [Emphasis in original]
The documents also include a previously released March 21, 2009, classified email document created by then-Clinton Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Strategic Communications and Senior Communications Advisor Phillipe Reines. Reines sent the email from his non-state.gov account with the subject line “Kharzai” to Clinton and Abedin. Reines writes “I think you know my close friend Jeremy Bash is now Panetta’s Chief of Staff at CIA.” The rest of the message is redacted under the National Security Act of 1947, which protects intelligence sources and methods from public disclosure.
“These new emails show Hillary Clinton was more than concerned about the handling of her records – both personal and official,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “What other damaging emails have Hillary Clinton and the Obama State Department withheld from the public?”
Last week, Judicial Watch uncovered new Clinton email records through court-ordered discovery.
In March, Judicial Watch released Clinton State Department emails dating from February 2009 that also call into question her statements about her emails. Those emails contained more evidence of the battle between security officials in the State Department, National Security Administration, Clinton and her staff over attempts to obtain secure BlackBerrys.
Hillary Clinton has repeatedly stated that she believes that the 55,000 pages of documents she turned over to the State Department in December 2014 included all of her work-related emails. In response to a court order in other Judicial Watch litigation, she declared under penalty of perjury that she had “directed that all my emails on clintonemail.com in my custody that were or are potentially federal records be provided to the Department of State, and on information and belief, this has been done.” This new email find is also at odds with her official campaign statement suggesting all “work or potentially work-related emails” were provided to the State Department.