top of page

Strip Her of Her Access

First of all, I don't believe it's the FBI's job as a law enforcement agency to make recommendations as to prosecution after an investigation is completed. They are not prosecutors and certainly not attorneys. That purview lies with the Justice Department. Attorney General Lynch, after her major gaffe in allowing Bill Clinton anywhere near a private conversation with her, announced she would follow the FBI recommendations. Not so fast Ms. Lynch. You have a staff of US Attorneys whose responsibility it is to assess the FBI report and decide if there are prosecutorial offenses. You can't just wash your hands and walk away.

Additionally, the FBI investigation found that Ms. Clinton and her staff were "extremely careless" in handling classified material. It's obvious the penalty for "extreme carelessness" in this matter should be the revocation of access to classified information. The FBI is the agency that investigates and recommends clearances. If Hillary Clinton and those of her staff have been found to have been involved in mishandling this sensitive information then in my opinion it would have been very proper to recommend that anyone involved in this incompetence should be stripped of any clearances they have and not be allowed further access. If so, then how could Ms. Clinton be qualified to occupy the White House with no clearance to classified information? This is a matter separate from criminal charges. If any person is found to have mishandled classified information it only makes sense that that they no longer be trusted with it. This works for every person in the United States why can't it work for our candidates? If Donald Trump had a clearance the same applies to him.

Finally, this lapse of judgment is no light matter. A candidate who was found incompetent and untrustworthy of handling Top Secret information which is identified thus: TOP SECRET: Applied to information or material the unauthorized disclosure of which reasonably could be expected to cause exceptionally grave damage to the national security should have no further access to it. Several of these documents were found on her servers. "GRAVE DAMAGE. " If this was anyone with integrity he or she would rightfully withdraw from consideration for the highest office. But we all know that's not going to happen. So how does this get handled in reality? It gets ignored, minimized and after all "What difference does it really make?"

Featured Posts
Check back soon
Once posts are published, you’ll see them here.
Recent Posts
Search By Tags
Follow Us
  • Facebook Basic Square
  • Twitter Basic Square
  • Google+ Basic Square
bottom of page