DRAFT: Open Letter 08/08/15 @ 1pm

Dear friend,
There have been a lot of news reports recently about emails and servers. I want to
clear up any questions or confusion you might have about this. Thats why Ive
asked the State Department to publish 55,000 pages of my work emails as quickly
as possible. Ive also offered to answer questions before Congress, and I look
forward to doing so in October. Im writing today to share some key facts that you
might find helpful. You can also read more at my website,
hillaryclinton.com/briefing.
There are two points in particular that I want to emphasize.
First, I want to be absolutely clear that I take classified information seriously and
so should everyone in government. As Secretary of State, I relied on intelligence
reports and other classified material every day to make hard choices about how to
protect America and advance our interests. State Department diplomats and
security personnel follow rigorous procedures to keep classified information safe,
including maintaining a special secure computer network from which it is
impossible to send messages to any unclassified or unsecure account or device.
I would never, ever do anything I thought might jeopardize our national security.
Not in a million years.
I hope the State Department and other relevant agencies will sort out as quickly as
possible which of the 55,000 pages of emails are appropriate to release to the
public. In the meantime, my team has worked with the Department to ensure these
files are stored in a safe and secure manner. To address any on-going security
questions from other agencies, I have directed my team to give my email server to
the Department of Justice, as well as a thumb drive containing copies of all the
emails already provided to the State Department.
Second, I know that a lot of Americans are scratching their heads over this whole
story. So let me explain.
When I arrived at the State Department in early 2009, I had to immediately get to
work rebuilding Americas tarnished global reputation and take on pressing
challenges in nearly every region of the world. I had used a Blackberry with a
personal email account in the Senate and during my Presidential campaign. At the
time, using a personal account seemed convenient. It was consistent with the
practice of prior Secretaries of State. And, while the Federal Records Act would be
1

DRAFT: Open Letter 08/08/15 @ 1pm

changed in 2014 to explicitly discourage use of personal email accounts for official
business, back in 2009 that was still years away.
Still, as Ive said before, I should have just used a government email account. I
wish I had thought more about the public records process. My attempt at keeping
life simple ended up making things complicated.
Most of all, I regret that this issue has in any way overshadowed the service and
accomplishments of the men and women of the State Department who work so
hard for our country. One of the reasons I am committed to getting my emails
released is that they will offer a window into the daily lives of our diplomats who
make such important contributions to Americas national security. At the end of
the day, when you actually read these emails, I am confident youll be as proud of
our record at the State Department as I am.
Sincerely,

DRAFT: Open Letter 08/08/15 @ 1pm

The Facts About Hillary Clintons Emails

(This is the current version on the website but we are updating)
Weve put all of the information about Hillary Clintons State Department emails
here. Just the facts, all in one place.
Clinton said she did not use her email to send or receive classified information, but
the State Department and two Inspectors General said some of these emails do
contain classified information. Was her statement inaccurate?
Clinton only used her account for unclassified email. A separate, closed system
was used by the State Department for the purpose of handling classified
communications, which was designed to prevent such information from being
transmitted anywhere other than within that system.
How did Clinton receive and consume classified information?
The Secretarys office was located in a secure area. Classified information was
viewed in hard copy by Clinton while in the office. While on travel, the State
Department had rigorous protocols for her and traveling staff to receive and
transmit information of all types.
As we saw in the prior two releases, information previously unclassified is
sometimes later upgraded to classified when reviewed for public release if the
State Department or another agency believes its public release could cause
potential harm to national security, law enforcement or diplomatic relations.
In terms of todays headlines, after reviewing a sampling of the 55,000 pages of
emails, the Inspectors General have proffered that four emails, which did not
contain any classified markings and/or dissemination controls, should have been
classified at the time they were sent. The State Department disagrees with this
assessment.
Was there a criminal inquiry requested by the Inspectors General for Clintons
email use because of this?
No. As the Department of Justice and Inspectors General made clear, the IGs did
not make a criminal referral. This was misreported by the New York Times.

DRAFT: Open Letter 08/08/15 @ 1pm

Would this issue not have arisen if she used a state.gov email address?
While State Departments review of her 55,000 emails brought the issue to the
Inspectors Generals' attentions, the four emails were on the unclassified .gov email
system. They were not on the separate, closed system used by State Department for
handling classified communications.
Why did Clinton use her own email account?
When Clinton got to the Department, she opted to use her personal email account
as a matter of convenience. It enabled her to reach people quickly and keep in
regular touch with her family and friends more easily given her travel schedule.
That is the only reason she used her own account.
Her usage was widely known to the over 100 State Department and U.S.
government colleagues she emailed, her address was visible on every email she
sent, and her use of her personal account was consistent with the practice of prior
Secretaries of State.
As Politico reported, "Like Hillary Clinton, former Secretary of State Colin Powell
also used a personal email account during his tenure at the State Department, an
aide confirmed in a statement. 'He was not aware of any restrictions nor does he
recall being made aware of any over the four years he served at State,' the
statement says. 'He sent emails to his staff generally via their State Department
email addresses. These emails should be on the State Department computers. He
might have occasionally used personal email addresses, as he did when emailing to
family and friends.'"
As Clinton has said, in hindsight, it would have been better to just have two
accounts. While she thought using one account would be easier, obviously, that has
not been the case.
Was it allowed?
Yes. The laws, regulations, and State Department policy in place during her tenure
permitted her to use a non-government email for work.
The 2009 National Archives regulation in place during her tenure required that
"[a]gencies that allow employees to send and receive official electronic mail
4

DRAFT: Open Letter 08/08/15 @ 1pm

messages using a system not operated by the agency must ensure that Federal
records sent or received on such systems are preserved in the appropriate agency
recordkeeping system." The regulation recognizes the use of non-government
email accounts.
As she has stated, Clinton's practice was to email government officials on their
".gov" accounts, so her work emails were immediately captured and preserved. In
fact, more than 90% of those emails should have already been captured in the State
Departments email system before she provided them with paper copies.
A Politifact analysis also confirmed that Clinton's practices complied with laws
and regulations, including support from the former director of a prominent
government accountability organization: "In Clinton's defense, we should note that
it was only after Clinton left the State Department, that the National Archives
issued a recommendation that government employees should avoid conducting
official business on personal emails (though they noted there might be extenuating
circumstances such as an emergency that require it). Additionally, in 2014,
President Barack Obama signed changes to the Federal Records Act that explicitly
said federal officials can only use personal email addresses if they also copy or
send the emails to their official account. Because these rules weren't in effect when
Clinton was in office, 'she was in compliance with the laws and regulations at the
time,' said Gary Bass, founder and former director of OMB Watch, a government
accountability organization."
Press reports say she used multiple devices a Blackberry and an iPad is that
true?
Clinton relied on her Blackberry for emailing. This was easiest for her. When the
iPad came out in 2010, she was as curious as others and found it great for
shopping, browsing, and reading articles when she traveled. She also had access to
her email account on her iPad and sometimes used it for that too.
Was she ever provided guidance about her use of a non-".gov" email account?
The State Department has and did provide guidance regarding the need to preserve
federal records. To address these requirements, it was her practice to email
government employees on their ".gov" email address. That way, work emails
would be immediately captured and preserved in government record-keeping
systems.

DRAFT: Open Letter 08/08/15 @ 1pm

What did Clinton provide to the State Department?

On December 5, 2014, 30,490 copies of work or potentially work-related emails
sent and received by Clinton from March 18, 2009, to February 1, 2013, were
provided to the State Department. This totaled roughly 55,000 pages. More than
90% of her work or potentially work-related emails provided to the Department
were already in the State Department's record-keeping system because those emails were sent to or received by "state.gov" accounts.
Before March 18, 2009, Clinton continued using an att.blackberry.net account that
she had used during her Senate service. Given her practice from the beginning of
emailing State Department officials on their state.gov accounts, her work-related
emails during these initial weeks would have been captured and preserved in the
State Department's record-keeping system. She, however, no longer had access to
these emails once she transitioned from this account.
Why did the Select Committee announce that she used multiple email addresses
during her tenure?
In fairness to the Committee, this was an honest misunderstanding. Clinton used
one email account during her tenure at State (with the exception of her initial
weeks in office while transitioning from an email account she had previously
used). In March 2013, a month after she left the Department, Gawker published the
email address she used while Secretary, and so she had to change the address on
her account.
At the time the printed copies were provided to the Department in 2014, because it
was the same account, the new email address established after she left office
appeared on the printed copies as the sender, and not the address she used as
Secretary. In fact, this address on the account did not exist until March 2013. This
led to understandable confusion that was cleared up directly with the Committee
after its press conference.
Why didn't Clinton provide her emails to the State Department until December
2014?
In 2014, after recognizing potential gaps in its overall recordkeeping system, the
State Department asked for the help of the four previous former Secretaries in
meeting the State Departments obligations under the Federal Records Act.

DRAFT: Open Letter 08/08/15 @ 1pm

Clinton responded to this request by providing the State Department with over
55,000 pages of emails. As it was Clinton's practice to email U.S. government
officials on their .gov accounts, the overwhelming majority of these emails should
have already been preserved in the State Departments email system.
In providing these emails to the Department, Clinton included all she had that were
even potentially work-relatedincluding emails about using a fax machine or
asking for iced tea during a meetingerring on the side of over-inclusion, as
confirmed by the Department and National Archives' determination that 1246
emails were "personal" records (which they have indicated will be returned to her).
After providing her work and potentially work-related emails, she chose not to
keep her personal, non-work related emails, which by definition, are not federal
records and were not requested by the Department or anyone else.
Why did the State Department ask for assistance in collecting records? Why did
the State Department need assistance in further meeting its requirements under the
Federal Records Act?
The State Department formally requested the assistance of the four previous former
Secretaries in a letter to their representatives dated October 28, 2014, to help in
further meeting the Departments requirements under the Federal Records Act.
The letter stated that in September 2013, the National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA) issued new guidance clarifying records management
responsibilities regarding the use of personal email accounts for government
business.
While this guidance was issued after all four former Secretaries had departed
office, the Department decided to ensure its records were as complete as possible
and sought copies of work emails sent or received by the Secretaries on their own
accounts.
Why did Clinton decide not to keep her personal emails?
These were private, personal messages, including emails about her daughter's
wedding plans, her mother's funeral services and condolence notes, as well as
emails on family vacations, yoga routines, and other items one would typically find
in their own email account, such as offers from retailers, spam, etc.
Did Clinton delete any emails while facing a subpoena?
7

DRAFT: Open Letter 08/08/15 @ 1pm

No. As noted, the emails that Clinton chose not to keep were personal emails
they were not federal records or even work-relatedand therefore were not subject
to any preservation obligation under the Federal Records Act or any request. Nor
would they have been subject to the subpoenawhich did not exist at the time
that was issued by the Benghazi Select Committee some three months later.
Rep. Gowdy's subpoena issued in March 2015 did not seek, and had nothing to do
with, her personal, non-work emails nor her server nor the request by State
Department last year for her help in their own record-keeping. Indeed in his March
19th letter, Rep. Gowdy expressly stated he was not seeking any emails that were
"purely personal in nature."
In March 2015, when Rep. Gowdy issued a subpoena to Clinton, the State
Department had received all of Clinton's work-related emails in response to their
2014 request, and indeed, had already provided Clinton's relevant emails to Rep.
Gowdys committee.
Rep. Gowdy, other Republicans, and some members of the media have seized on a
CNN interview with Clinton to question her on this point. Rep. Gowdy has even
gone so far as to say Clinton is lying. But he and the others are clearly mistaken.
As Vox reported, "[S]he didn't lie about the subpoena. Clinton clearly wasn't
responding to the question of whether she'd ever been subpoenaed by the Benghazi
Committee but whether she'd been subpoenaed before she wiped the emails from
her server." Additionally, Factcheck.org said in its analysis, "Clinton's denial came
in response to a question about deleting emails 'while facing a subpoena,' and
Clinton objected to Keilar's 'assumption.' Clintons campaign said that the emails
were deleted before she received the subpoena and that was the point Clinton was
making." Politifact added, "Suggesting that Clinton deleted emails while facing a
subpoena contradicts what we know about the controversy so far."
Vox went on to further decry Rep. Gowdy's reaction, saying, "[T]his one's a
particularly absurd gimmick, even for a committee that is selectively leaking from
depositions and documents to justify its existence. If there was a more extreme
category of dissembling than 'pants on fire,' now would be the time for Politifact to
roll it out on the House Republicans."
Why was the State Department given printed copies?

DRAFT: Open Letter 08/08/15 @ 1pm

That is the requirement. The instructions regarding electronic mail in the Foreign
Affairs Manual (the Department's policy manual) require that "until technology
allowing archival capabilities for long-term electronic storage and retrieval of
email messages is available and installed, those messages warranting preservation
as records (for periods longer than current E-mail systems routinely maintain them)
must be printed out and filed with related records." [5 FAM 443.3].
Were any work items deleted in the course of producing the printed copies?
No.
How many emails were in her account? And how many of those were provided to
the State Department?
Her email account contained a total of 62,320 sent and received emails from March
2009 to February 2013. Based on the review process described below, 30,490 of
these emails were provided to the Department, and the remaining 31,830 were
private, personal records.
How and who decided what should be provided to the State Department?
The Federal Records Act puts the obligation on the government official to
determine what is and is not a federal record. The State Department Foreign Affairs
Manual outlines guidance "designed to help employees determine which of their email messages must be preserved as federal records and which may be deleted
without further authorization because they are not Federal record materials." [5
FAM 443.1(c)].
Following conversations with State Department officials and in response to the
State Department's 2014 letter to former Secretaries, Clinton directed her attorneys
to assist by identifying and preserving all emails that could potentially be federal
records. This entailed a multi-step process to review each email and provide
printed copies of Clinton's emails to the State Department, erring on the side of
including anything that might be even potentially work-related.
A search was conducted on Clinton's email account for all emails sent and received
from 2009 to her last day in office, February 1, 2013.
After this universe was determined, a search was conducted for a ".gov" (not just
state.gov) in any address field in an email. This produced over 27,500 emails,
9

DRAFT: Open Letter 08/08/15 @ 1pm

representing more than 90% of the 30,490 printed copies that were provided to the
State Department.
To help identify any potential non-".gov" correspondence that should be included,
a search of first and last names of more than 100 State Department and other U.S.
government officials was performed. This included all Deputy Secretaries, Under
Secretaries, Assistant Secretaries, Ambassadors-at-Large, Special Representatives
and Envoys, members of the Secretary's Foreign Policy Advisory Board, and other
senior officials to the Secretary, including close aides and staff.
Next, to account for non-obvious or non-recognizable email addresses or
misspellings or other idiosyncrasies, the emails were sorted and reviewed both by
sender and recipient.
Lastly, a number of terms were specifically searched for, including: "Benghazi"
and "Libya."
These additional three steps yielded just over another 2,900 emails, including
emails from former Administration officials and long-time friends that may not be
deemed by the State Department to be federal records. And hundreds of these
emails actually had already been forwarded onto the state.gov system and captured
in real-time.
With respect to materials that the Select Committee has requested, the State
Department has stated that just under 300 emails related to Libya were provided by
the State Department to the Select Committee in response to a November 2014
letter, which contained a broader request for materials than prior requests from the
House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.
Given Clinton's practice of emailing State Department officials on their state.gov
addresses, the State Department already had, and had already provided, the Select
Committee with emails from Clinton in August 2014 prior to requesting and
receiving printed copies of her emails.
The review process described above confirmed Clinton's practice of emailing State
Department officials on their .gov address, with the vast majority of the printed
copies of work-related emails Clinton provided to the State Department simply
duplicating what was already captured in the State Department's record-keeping
system in real time.

10

DRAFT: Open Letter 08/08/15 @ 1pm

Did Clinton use this account to communicate with foreign officials?

During her time at State, she communicated with foreign officials in person,
through correspondence, and by telephone. The review of all of her emails revealed
only one email with a foreign (UK) official.
Did she withhold any work emails? What about the 15 emails that Sid Blumenthal
provided to the Select Committee that she did not provide to the State Department?
She provided the State Department with all work and potentially work-related
emails that she had, including all of her correspondence with Sid Blumenthal. We
understand that Mr. Blumenthal had some emails that Clinton did not have, and
Clinton had some emails that Mr. Blumenthal did not have, but it is important to
note that none of those emails provide any new insights on the attack on our
facilities in Benghazi.
Do you think a third party should be allowed to review what was turned over to the
State Department, as well as the remainder that was not?
The Federal Records Act puts the obligation on the government official, not the
agency or a third party, to determine what is and is not a federal record. The State
Department Foreign Affairs Manual outlines guidance "designed to help employees
determine which of their e-mail messages must be preserved as federal records and
which may be deleted without further authorization because they are not Federal
record materials." [5 FAM 443.1(c)].
Clinton responded to the State Departments request by providing approximately
55,000 pages of her work and potentially work-related emails. She has also taken
the unprecedented step of asking that those emails be made public. In doing so, she
has sought to support the State Department's efforts, fulfill her responsibility of
record-keeping, and provide the chance for the public to assess the work she and
officials at the State Department did during her tenure.
After her work-related emails were identified and preserved, Clinton chose not to
keep her private, personal emails that were not federal records, including emails
about her daughter's wedding plans, her mother's funeral service, family vacations,
etc.

11

DRAFT: Open Letter 08/08/15 @ 1pm

Government officials are granted the privacy of their personal, non-work related
emails, including personal emails on .gov accounts. Clinton exercised her privilege
to ensure the continued privacy of her personal, non-work related emails.
Can't she release the emails she provided to the State Department herself?
Because the printed copies of work-related emails she provided to the State
Department include federal records of the Department, the Department needs to
review these emails before they can be made public. She called for them to be
made available as soon as possible, and is glad to see the Department has begun
releasing them.
Some of the emails released show Clinton emailed aides at times on their personal,
rather than .gov accounts. Was she trying to hide these communications?
It was Clinton's practice to email U.S. government officials on their .gov accounts
if it was work-related. This is evidenced in the emails released so far. In reviewing
her emails in 2014, there was a fraction of emails with work-related information
sent to U.S. government officials personal accounts, and those were provided to
the State Department. The overwhelming majority of her work-related emails were
to .gov accounts.
Where was the server for her email located?
The server for her email was physically located on her property, which is protected
by U.S. Secret Service.
What level of encryption was employed? Who was the service provider?
The security and integrity of her family's electronic communications was taken
seriously from the onset when it was first set up for President Clinton's team.
While the curiosity about the specifics of this set up is understandable, given what
people with ill-intentions can do with such information in this day and age, there
are concerns about broadcasting specific technical details about past and current
practices. Suffice it to say, robust protections were put in place and additional
upgrades and techniques employed over time as they became available, including
consulting and employing third party experts.
Was the server ever hacked?

12

DRAFT: Open Letter 08/08/15 @ 1pm

No, there is no evidence there was ever a breach.

Was there ever an unauthorized intrusion into her email or did anyone else have
acess to it?
No.
What was done after her email was exposed in February 2013 after the hacker
known as "Guccifer" hacked Sid Blumenthals account?
While this was not a breach of Clinton's account, because her email address was
exposed, steps were taken at that time to ensure the security and integrity of her
electronic communications, including changing her email address.
Was the State Department able to respond to requests related to FOIA or
Congressional requests before they received printed copies of her work-related
emails?
Yes. As the Select Committee has said, the State Department provided the
Committee with relevant emails it already had on the state.gov system before the
State Department requested any printed copies from former Secretaries, and four
months before the State Department received the printed copies.
For example, in the well-publicized hack of Sid Blumenthal's email account, a note
he sent Clinton on September 12, 2012, was posted online. At first blush, one
might not think this exchange would be captured on the state.gov system. But in
fact, Clinton forwarded the email, that very same day, onto the state.gov system.
And the email was produced by the State Department to the Select Committee, and
acknowledged by the Select Committee, in August 2014.
This example illustrates: 1) when an email from a non-".gov" sender had some
connection to work or might add to the understanding of State Department
officials, it was Clintons practice to forward it to officials at their "state.gov"
address; and 2) the State Department was able to search and produce Clintons
emails when needed long before, and unrelated to, receiving the printed copies as
they were already captured on state.gov accounts.

13