It’s time for the Democratic Party to come to terms with Hillary Clinton’s wrongdoings, fabrications, and blatant neglect.
The Office of Inspector General’s report released Wednesday is the most crucial piece of evidence that’s been seen to date suggesting Clinton has broken federal law through unauthorized use of a private email server.
Now, while the IG continues to state she has broken “policies,” they fail to talk about the fact that the “policies” she has broken were designed around the Federal Records Act of 1950. By violating the policy, Clinton has not only violated the law, but also consistently denied doing so publicly numerous times.
Superdelegates within the Democratic Party need to take the findings of this report, and her visibly inconsistent defense, into serious consideration.
“OIG found no evidence that the Secretary requested or obtained guidance or approval to conduct official business via a personal email account on her private server,” the report stated.
Arguments to the contrary will point out that former Secretary of State Colin Powell was found to have used a private email as well. However, there is no wrongdoing by using a private email, as long as an official doesn’t use it to discuss matters related to the government or solely depends on it.
Clinton, as everyone knows, used a private server set up in her own home in Chappaqua, New York. The key finding is that she did not seek any sort of authorization from the State Department, and officials have even said they “did not — and would not — approve her exclusive reliance on a personal email account to conduct Department business, because of the restrictions in the FAM and the security risks in doing so.”
This is just the beginning of what could be a very tumultuous next few months for Clinton. The FBI is in the midst of concluding their report in which they are investigating her email server.
For months, Clinton defended her use of a private server and personal email address, saying she was authorized and compliant with State Department policy, and in one report, her entire argument has been proven to be completely and utterly false. The following video in which she defends herself numerous times exemplifies the fact that she lied to the public.
The Department of Justice still could indict her. Regardless of whether that is carried out, surely the recommendation alone should be enough to warrant the superdelegates to reconsider. Never in the history of U.S. politics has a presidential candidate been under an FBI investigation leading up to the convention.
A vast majority of the superdelegates have already pledged their support for the Democratic frontrunner. After the recent report and the pending FBI investigation, they must realize the significance and the potential consequences of backing Clinton at the Democratic National Convention.
With all of these facts being public knowledge they are proving that despite Clinton violating federal law, she is still a viable candidate to be commander in chief. It also undermines the outpouring support Bernie Sanders has received. By putting forth Clinton at the convention, they potentially hand Donald Trump the White House who, according to polls, would lose to Sanders but defeat Clinton.
Superdelegates were designed to give high-ranking party officials more power to protect the party’s interests, and by sticking with Clinton, they risk a Trump presidency. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, DNC Chairperson, has even said that superdelegates have been created to prevent grassroots movements from coming into fruition.
If this election has proven anything, it’s that, based on the strong support behind Trump and Sanders, most of the American people are calling for some form of anti-establishment politics.
RickrInSf
May 31, 2016 at 4:25 pm
I’m sure that the “super”delegates consider Trump far less of a threat then Bernie, after all, Trump will accept their money for favors
Erik Smith
June 2, 2016 at 3:35 pm
What I find so interesting is the perspective people have in regards to these super delegates. My impression from the start even in light of all of her known problems, these SD’s would, in their overwhelming support, all at once, pre pledge their support to her. This isn’t even to say before any other names were on the tickets. This to me seems like a pre planned support proposition that has to have some kind of unknown risk to reward ratio that makes this bold move worthy. I see it not only as being accomplices to her crimes of which we don’t even know yet, but as a prejudicial way to sway influential voters who may have been reserving their votes on some sort of future outcome in regards to her indictment. If this doesn’t show some kind of fraudulent intent on behalf of the SD’s to influence, I don’t know why they would have pledged so early on. It did matter and that is one reason why they did it in my opinion, regardless if it was legal or illegal to do. I feel that Sanders supporters are getting the shaft in this whole mess. The courts themselves have to see this as a prejudicial act of influence, as the judges of certain trials choose what is or isn’t admissible in the courtroom so the jury isn’t swayed by prejudicial evidence. This also seems to have a possible second death of a different bird with the same thrown stone. This is, in my opinion, after some researching of other opinions, also a way to possibly influence the FBI into their investigation on an indictment or not. An early support by the SD’s seem to work even better by discrediting each of these reasons, when pinned to the wall on one of the accusations, according to the legality of the rules on pledging. Then the media sure doesn’t like to talk about this at all. Why? This seems like it would be the biggest story in the world when you consider the fact that if Trump were in her shoes with all of this SD support, every last reporter in the country or world would be finding out each of these SD’s motivations for all of them choosing at the same time, suggesting an elaborate operation, to find out what each of the interests that they hope to have served, all the little programs they want funded or any other unknown programs we don’t know about. I’d venture to say that there is something very big to lose by the actions these people have taken. Yet no one in the media talks about it, hints of something shady or anything. They get to be successful in hiding the secret, yet Trump and Sanders get incoming from the woman who wants to be president of the US, with her problems festering before our eyes. How is it that she is able to not have any crowds like these others, yet be where she is today? Before the times of internet and mass communication, they would have gotten away with another stolen election. This is the transition period that has fouled up their best thinkers of the “think tanks” that get funded by who other than we, for their good. It is unbelievable the boldness in the blatant fraud going on and we don’t have a media outlet yet with the balls to break down the doors of corruption. The FBI, in my opinion will never go through with their findings if there is not a media that is willing to investigate the whole story and gather support. This is not about left or right, this is about the future of democracy. How precious is it to those of whom want their kids and offspring to look back, if able, to wonder why their ancestors did nothing in light of the evidence which common sense is able to light up the world with.