Prepare to watch five consecutive minutes of utter garbage from the least trusted woman in America. Prodded by interviewer Charlie Rose over several elements of her national security-compromising email scandal, over which she was harshly reprimanded by the FBI, a testy Hillary Clinton recycled multiple provable lies. Watch the exchange below, then let's dismantle her campaign of ongoing dishonesty piece by piece (via America Rising):
Virtually everything she says here is either a flat falsehood, or an intentional distortion. Claim one: Comey said there is "no evidence" that her unsecure email server was breached or hacked. Ruling: Misleading. Comey said there is no direct evidence that she was hacked, then laid out a clear case for why it's quite likely that she was -- concurring with analysis from the former Defense Secretary, the deputy CIA director, and a senior defense intelligence official. "You can't rule it in," she said. Here's what the FBI chief said:
This means: "Yeah, we can't directly prove it, but you can be pretty sure it happened." pic.twitter.com/RS719HZSge— Tom Nichols (@RadioFreeTom) July 5, 2016
Claim two: Comey "clarified" his "extremely careless" condemnation of her email scheme during Congressional testimony, and did not call her actions 'sloppy.' Ruling: Misleading, and false. Comey did clarify his characterization before the House committee, but not the way she implies. He did not walk back his "extremely careless" phrasing; he went further. Hillary's conduct was the "definition of recklessness" he explained. Also, the statement he read at that press conference was extremely thorough and carefully-worded. Zero "clarification" was necessary or offered. "No [Comey] did not" say she was 'sloppy,' Hillary asserted, interrupting the host to correct him. To the transcript:
Rep. Scott DesJarlais: I don’t want to put words in your mouth – but is it fair to say that your interpretation of Hillary Clinton’s handling of top secret information and classified documents was extremely careless?
DesJarlais: And is it fair to say that you said, you went on to define extremely careless, that Hillary Clinton’s handling of top secret information was sloppy or represents sloppiness?
Comey: Yeah, that’s another way of trying to express the same concept.
Claim three: It has been "clarified" that there were no classified markings on her emails. Ruling: Irrelevant and false. Comey explained -- as many others have, and as Hillary herself acknowledged in a sworn pledge -- that the 'marked' distinction is meaningless and misleading. "Any reasonable person" in Clinton's position should know that classified emails, of which there were many, had no place whatsoever on a private server, he said. And several of the emails on that server actually were marked classified at the time, even if the State Department now says that in retrospect, they shouldn't have been. That revision does not erase the contemporaneous markings she's claimed repeatedly never existed. It's worth recalling that the State Department has also retroactively determined that roughly two dozen of her emails were so top secret that they cannot be released in public, even in redacted form.
Claim four: Comey's "careless" verdict doesn't apply because "300 professionals" wouldn't have been so reckless. Ruling: Incomplete and misleading. Nowhere close to 300 people emailed her classified materials through her server. Far fewer had any hand whatsoever in the wrongful, national security-endangering dissemination of top-secret-and-above email chains. And the notion that nobody ever objected to any of this is also incorrect. Questions were raised, at which point underlings were scolded and instructed never to raise the issue again. And Mrs. Clinton was specifically and personally warned on two separate occasions of the risks her improper email scheme presented to state secrets. She willfully disregarded them. This also undermines her follow-up assurance that nobody ever has to worry about her doing something like this "ever again." She knew this was a problem, having been admonished in vivid, clear terms. She didn't care.
Claim five: Other Secretaries of State have "done the same thing," she said, avoiding the question of whether she 'should have known better.' Ruling: False. Neither Secretary Powell nor Secretary Rice set up a disallowed private, unsecure server through which they conducted all of their official business. The many relevant distinctions Clinton tries to elide in this answer are outlined here.