Though some choose to ignore the matter, excuse it, or want to wish it away, Ms. Clinton's deliberate set up and use of a private, insecure server for official -- including classified -- government business is very real.
The recent Washington Post story that Ms. Clinton personally wrote and initiated 104 emails containing classified information underscores her unsatisfactory, disqualifying judgment. In all, thousands of her emails have been determined to contain classified information, forever and irrevocably disputing her statement, “I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email.”
Based on her statements and those of her surrogates and spokespersons, she would want the voters to believe it was simply an issue of the information not being marked as such at the time she handled it; she simply passed on information others failed to protect; it is a matter of over classification; everyone else did it; or equally vacuous rhetoric. A calm analysis again underscores these arguments.
At the worst, Ms. Clinton knowingly and deliberately established by affirmative action a system that bypassed (on countless occasions) federal laws and regulations governing the handling and protection of classified information, as well as federal records keeping subject to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). If this is the case, her judgment was unsatisfactory and disqualifying.
As covered by the Washington Post piece, Ms. Clinton personally initiated at least 100 emails containing classified information on her insecure server, sending many of them to individuals who did not possess the requisite security clearances to receive said information. Doing so again displayed unsatisfactory and disqualifying judgment.
Repeatedly, as addressed in a recent Washington Post piece, Ms. Clinton has parsed, misled, obfuscated, and misrepresented in her attempts to deny, justify, and nullify. This approach to a serious problems again displays more unsatisfactory and disqualifying judgment.
Alternatively, Ms. Clinton was contemptuous of the contents of the nondisclosure agreement she signed at the beginning of her service as secretary of state, displaying equally unsatisfactory and disqualifying judgment.
Or Ms. Clinton is so ignorant of the government regulations and laws pertaining to the protection of classified information, contrary to her March 2015 assurances to the contrary, that her judgment in the matter is unsatisfactory and disqualifying. As we know, ignorance of the law is no excuse for breaking it.
No matter how one chooses to calmly analyze the publicly known information, no other conclusion can be drawn other than Ms. Clinton has irrefutably and profoundly displayed unsatisfactory and disqualifying judgment in this unambiguous matter.
Such a major character flaw can not, must not be overlooked when considering if an individual is qualified for the office of the presidency of the United States.
This blog was updated 9 Mar 2016.
No comments:
Post a Comment