On the one hand it was only fifteen emails, on the other hand there is no way to figure out what else she didn’t turn over. Searching all of the Hillary Clinton emails on its servers, the State Department yesterday admitted it was missing “all or part of 15 emails from longtime confidant Sidney Blumenthal released this week by a House panel investigating the 2012 attack on the U.S. diplomatic facility in Benghazi, Libya.”
However Mrs. Clinton’s spokesman denies there were any documents withheld.
“She has turned over 55,000 pages of materials to the State Department, including all emails in her possession from Mr. Blumenthal,” said Clinton spokesman Nick Merrill on Thursday.
Officials said the exchanges with Blumenthal were not among the 55,000 pages of emails Clinton handed over to the State Department, even though Clinton insisted she gave her former agency all of her work-related correspondence from private account during her time at State.
“We have confirmed that the emails Secretary Clinton provided the department include almost all of the material in Mr. Blumenthal’s production,” one of the officials said. “There here are, however, a limited number of instances 15 in which we could not locate all or part of the content of a document from his production within the tens of thousands of emails she gave us. But the official added, “The substance of those 15 emails is not relevant to the 2012 attacks in Benghazi.”
Whether the emails had anything to do with Benghazi is not really the issue. Rather it is that neither the State Department or Congressional Committee would have known about the existence of the emails if Blumenthal hadn’t turned them over. This raises two key questions. First, do we know for sure whether Blumenthal, a longtime friend of the Clintons, turned over all the emails in his possession? The answer is that he may have but that we have no way of knowing for sure. The second question is whether there any other “non-State Department” advisers who sent emails to Clinton that no one knows about? The answer to this question is the same.
If this mini-drama involved almost anybody besides a Clinton, the natural inclination might be to allow for the possibility of an accidental omission. But when you factor in all the scandals and misstatements Hillary Clinton has she made of the years, there can be only one truth. She cannot be trusted without verification from an outside neutral source.
Cross-posted at The Lid