The never ending saga concerning Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server is the gift that keeps on giving. It was recently revealed by the New York Times that two separate Inspectors General referred the matter to the Department of Justice for further investigation due to concern that classified material may have been mishandled.
The original report claimed that IG investigators reviewed a sample of 40 emails, out of an estimated 50,000 Sec. Clinton is suspected to have held on her private server, and found 4 were considered classified. While 4 may seem like a minuscule number, even an oversight, it is 10% of a very small sample, which is part of a much larger potential pool. Statistically, this means thousands of classified emails could have been compromised. But, does it really matter if there are 4 or 4,000?
Secretary Clinton and her campaign have simultaneously offered denial and excuses, which is itself usually a red flag. Claims that the messages were not classified when received, that the server contained sensitive personal emails and assurances that no classified material was stored on the servers not only contradict each other but are repeated refusal to cooperate with Congress. Whether or not the original complaints are rooted in political revenge really do not matter, as this is one of the areas where the ends do justify the means.
Every employee who handles potentially classified material not only undergoes a background investigation but is thoroughly schooled in the handling of that material. The average employee is prohibited from viewing such material on non-official devices, forwarding to individuals without clearance or storing the information in insecure locations. Violations of any of these provisions can result in discipline including loss of clearance, termination or even criminal charges – just ask General Pertraeus.
So how is it that the Secretary of State, a position which routinely requires the handling of classified information, was apparently operating in violation of almost every aspect of these requirements? Certainly the State Department servers are capable of handling these emails as well as any private server. Likewise, if she was utilizing a handheld device, it would not have been difficult for her to obtain and use a State Department device designed to be used with a secure account. The only difference is the official servers and devices are subject to monitoring.
Why Secretary Clinton chose to disregard the well established procedures and whether or not this information jeopardized national security is for investigators to determine. Hopefully the Inspectors General reports will result in a thorough investigation by professional career civil servants who do so out of a sense of duty and not due to political affiliation. Only then will authorities be able to take the appropriate action. What is for the American people to decide is whether this is the behavior we can accept from our senior officials.
Disclaimer: The content in this article is the opinion of the writer and does not necessarily reflect the policies or opinions of US Patriot Tactical.
Latest posts by Tom Burrell (see all)
- REVIEW: GARMONT T8 Extreme GTX – 15 October, 2018
- Fall 2018 – New Tactical Products – 1 October, 2018
- Common Pack Break Points & How to Test for Durability – 30 September, 2018