Norm Sauer: Hillary’s first loyalty | TheUnion.com

Norm Sauer: Hillary’s first loyalty

Norm Sauer
Columnist

What a week it was for Hillary Clinton.

On Tuesday after her husband Bill met with attorney general Loretta Lynch in a plane on the Pheonix airport tarmac, President Obama lauds, “there has never been any man or woman more qualified for this office than Hillary Clinton.”

Concurrently, FBI Director James Comey delivers a blistering indictment of Hillary’s extremely careless handling of highly sensitive emails. He concludes 110 emails in 52 email chains contained classified information when sent, and of those eight chains were top secret and seven contained the most sensitive secrets our government protects. None of these emails “should have been on any kind of unclassified system.” Stunningly, he then declares “no reasonable prosecutor” (Lynch?) would bring charges against Hillary.

By the day’s end, Hillary and the mainstream media believe she is out of hot water. But the fat lady wasn’t singing for Hillary quite yet.

Support Local Journalism

Xxjxjxjjxjxjxj

Comey warned his recommendation for no indictment did not suggest a person in similar circumstances as Hillary would face no consequences: “To the contrary, those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions.” Any other government official could still face consequences such as being fired or demoted. But, could Hillary now be promoted to the presidency of the United States?

Suggesting “the fix” was in, before Congress Comey revealed the FBI did not review Hillary’s prior sworn Congressional testimony about her emails during its investigation, and that Hillary was not under oath when interviewed by the FBI after Lynch’s tarmac meeting with husband Bill.

Nevertheless, Comey’s testimony of the FBI’s findings reveals Hillary may very well have committed perjury in her earlier Congressional testimony prompting a referral from Congress to the FBI for such crime(s). The lies concern Hillary’s testimony she used “one device” not several; that no emails were “marked classified” when sent or received; that there were no security breaches to her email; that she communicated with officials on their .gov emails, instead of their personal accounts; and that the State Department was careful with classified emails.

Forgotten in all this is that earlier this year Fox News reported that the FBI inquiry into Hillary had expanded into a public corruption investigation — specifically “whether the possible ‘intersection’ of Clinton Foundation work and State Department business may have violated public corruption laws.” For example, the New York Times reported last year that when Hillary was Secretary of State, the head of a Canadian uranium company funneled more than $2 million to the Clinton Foundation when it needed approval from the State Department to sell control of the company to the Russian atomic energy agency. And there are many other examples of the Clintons being paid extraordinary sums of money from foreign sources surrounding Hillary’s service as Secretary of State.

In his remarks before Congress, Comey was silent on the public corruption track, declining to say whether the Clinton Foundation was being investigated. One would hope Comey would be transparent about whether or not a public corruption investigation is ongoing. As with Comey’s disclosure of Hillary’s handling of national security emails, the American people deserve to know sooner than later.

Additionally, the State Department announced that it was reopening its own investigation into Hillary’s mishandling of classified emails, according to the Associated Press. The internal investigation could lead to a number of administrative penalties, including stripping Hillary and her top aides of their security clearances.

That same day, a group of senators led by Marco Rubio are pushing for a law stripping Hillary of her security credentials in the event the intelligence community won’t charge her.

If Hillary became our President it would be impossible for her to function without security clearance.

Despite all these challenges one must remember President Obama can pardon Hillary for any and all crimes committed by her before he leaves office. The questions remains, however, whether he can do anything to reinstate her security clearance should she be stripped of the same.

After 30 years of highest level government experience as first lady, as U.S. Senator from New York, and as Secretary of State, it is hard to believe Hillary was or is clueless regarding emails and national security. Rather, it’s more likely she had her own personal emails to keep her business dealings beyond the reach of public and congressional scrutiny and accountability.

For Hillary, whatever suits her needs is more important than what the country needs. Indeed, Hillary’s first loyalty is Hillary.

Norm Sauer, who lives in Nevada City, is a member of The Union Editorial Board. His opinion is his own and does not reflect the viewpoint of The Union or its editorial board. Write to him at EditBoard@TheUnion.com.


Support Local Journalism

Readers around Grass Valley and Nevada County make The Union’s work possible. Your financial contribution supports our efforts to deliver quality, locally relevant journalism.

Now more than ever, your support is critical to help us keep our community informed about the evolving coronavirus pandemic and the impact it is having locally. Every contribution, however large or small, will make a difference.

Your donation will help us continue to cover COVID-19 and our other vital local news.

 

Connect with needs and opportunities from

Get immediate access to organizations and people in our area that need your help or can provide help during the Coronavirus crisis.


Start a dialogue, stay on topic and be civil.
If you don't follow the rules, your comment may be deleted.