Former Obama Defense Intelligence Chief: Hillary Should End Her Presidential Campaign!
This is getting serious! Hillary Clinton’s email scandal was already a very serious matter. In fact, it has been since the news on the matter first began leaking out and every liberal with a voice was saying that it was no big deal. However, we’ve long since passed the point of no return on this being a “real” problem (as opposed to all those “fake scandals” of Obama’s), and we have now reached the stage in our little drama where even President Obama’s own people are saying Hillary Clinton is finished.
On Wednesday Lt. General Michael Flynn (Ret.) told the Daily Caller that he believed Hillary Clinton should drop out of the presidential campaign.
”I think Hillary Clinton, for the good of the country, should step down and let this FBI investigation play out.”
The problem, according to Flynn and other former intelligence officials, is that Clinton allowed some of the nation’s most highly classified information to move across her entirely unsecured server.
The documents “had to be moved off electronically or removed out of the secure site physically, then it had to be put onto an unclassified email system,” Flynn said. “Someone who does this is completely irresponsible, but totally unaccountable and shows a streak of arrogance to the American public that is unworthy of anyone thinking they can run for President of the United States.”
“This is unbelievable,” Flynn said. “I don’t think anybody should be talking about her being potentially the next President of the United States.”
Col. James Waurishuk who worked as a deputy director of intelligence for the U.S. Central Command and on the White House National Security Council under President George H.W. Bush explained that the entire debacle was even worse than the national media seemed to realize.
“In order for Mrs. Clinton to get Top Secret/Special Access Programs onto her private server, numerous, redundant safeguards were deliberately bypassed, probably by unauthorized personnel who were given access to these documents. It was a deliberate, intentional act. It just could not happen by accident,” Waurishuk said.
Waurishuk, who was a SAP program manager at one point in his career, said a government official “cannot have accesses to a SAP’s unless they receive a special indoctrination into the SAP based on an operational ‘must know’ that exceeds all other ‘need to know’ standards.”
He said that Clinton’s “staff aides like Huma Abedin and Cheryl Mills had absolutely ‘zero’ reason to have any access to any SAPs, period. How that happened and who authorized it is criminal in itself.”
It seems as though the State Department is finally taking the scandal seriously as well, likely because the FBI’s investigation seems to be growing in both depth and breadth. On Thursday the State Department issued the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation for documents that could shed light on Hillary Clinton’s interactions with other nations during her time as Secretary of State. The State Department is also seeking access to records relating to Clinton’s closest aide, Huma Abedin. While this investigation does not seem to be part of the FBI’s ongoing investigation, the two could indeed overlap. One of the concerns that some conservatives have had for some time is that Clinton used her role at the State Department to leverage funding for the Clinton Foundation, which proved the Clinton family with a generous income. Clinton’s team has long denied this, but there is a mountain of circumstantial evidence pointing to the possibility that Hillary Clinton may be the most corrupt politician of the last century. This corruption could be the reason that the Clinton team established the unsecure private server in the first place (hence the connected investigations), and more email discovery could lead to a much wider corruption scandal.
Which may all be why the State Department is now admitting (FINALLY) that the Clinton email breach is a very serious matter indeed.
Article reposted with permission from Eagle Rising, the opinions and views shared do not necessarily reflect the views of The Washington Standard.