There are inaccuracies in the reporting and I appreciate the Washington Post in coming to the forefront to help clear it up. I also believe Hillary Clinton is unaware of many of these details.
The political machine of the right wing is simply looking for something that actually will result in significant damage to Hillary Clinton. So, this is the type of mess that is created. It ultimately has to be the Attorney General that brings any information forward. Until the Attorney General has sifted through this there is no real fact. Whoever brought this forward probably did the former Secretary a great favor. Then again, I don't know; even when President Obama brought his long form birth certificate to the public it didn't do a darn thing.
July 27, 2015
By Erik Wemple
...The lede of the story, (click here) published online last Thursday night, now states, “Two inspectors general have asked the Justice Department to open an investigation into whether sensitive government information was mishandled in connection with the personal email account Hillary Rodham Clinton used as secretary of state, senior government officials said Thursday.”
In deference to Baquet — and as pointed out by Sullivan — the Times was not the only outlet to get confirmation that a criminal referral was in the works. And staffers told Sullivan that this was no one-source wonder. Matt Purdy, the story’s direct editor, noted that the original piece rested on “multiple, reliable, highly placed sources.” Perhaps in light of what unfolded on Friday, Purdy will reconsider that second adjective.
In a Friday statement, Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.), ranking member of the House oversight committee, lumped the Clinton e-mail story in with other instances in which news outlets have attempted to report on documents they’ve never seen. ABC News in 2013 famously mis-portrayed some Obama administration e-mails regarding Benghazi in large part because they were described by sources — and not handed over in full. A month ago, Politico, apparently relying on the same sourcing strategy, inaccurately abridged an e-mail exchange between Clinton and loyalist Sidney Blumenthal. “This is the latest example in a series of inaccurate leaks to generate false front-page headlines—only to be corrected later,” said Cummings in a statement....
The political machine of the right wing is simply looking for something that actually will result in significant damage to Hillary Clinton. So, this is the type of mess that is created. It ultimately has to be the Attorney General that brings any information forward. Until the Attorney General has sifted through this there is no real fact. Whoever brought this forward probably did the former Secretary a great favor. Then again, I don't know; even when President Obama brought his long form birth certificate to the public it didn't do a darn thing.
July 27, 2015
By Erik Wemple
...The lede of the story, (click here) published online last Thursday night, now states, “Two inspectors general have asked the Justice Department to open an investigation into whether sensitive government information was mishandled in connection with the personal email account Hillary Rodham Clinton used as secretary of state, senior government officials said Thursday.”
In deference to Baquet — and as pointed out by Sullivan — the Times was not the only outlet to get confirmation that a criminal referral was in the works. And staffers told Sullivan that this was no one-source wonder. Matt Purdy, the story’s direct editor, noted that the original piece rested on “multiple, reliable, highly placed sources.” Perhaps in light of what unfolded on Friday, Purdy will reconsider that second adjective.
In a Friday statement, Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.), ranking member of the House oversight committee, lumped the Clinton e-mail story in with other instances in which news outlets have attempted to report on documents they’ve never seen. ABC News in 2013 famously mis-portrayed some Obama administration e-mails regarding Benghazi in large part because they were described by sources — and not handed over in full. A month ago, Politico, apparently relying on the same sourcing strategy, inaccurately abridged an e-mail exchange between Clinton and loyalist Sidney Blumenthal. “This is the latest example in a series of inaccurate leaks to generate false front-page headlines—only to be corrected later,” said Cummings in a statement....
