Here’s why Hillary Clinton losing her security clearance matters for the rest of us foxnews.com/opinion/heres-…
In addition to Hillary, The State Department also withdrew security clearances from five people Clinton had previously requested clearances for, as she had designated them “researchers.”
One was Cheryl Mills, who was once the deputy White House counsel for President Bill Clinton who defended him during his 1999 impeachment trial. The names of the others were redacted.
The mainstream media is treating the loss of these clearances as a move by Clinton to avoid a political snub by the Trump administration.
Treating this security issue in such a purely political manner misses a growing problem that the media is purposely trying to ignore, as an honest analysis of it doesn’t help their attacks on the current administration.
Hillary Clinton should have lost her clearance back when the government found out she had classified information on her private servers.
Actually, they should have done this even before that; she should have lost her security clearance when she left her public position, as secretary of state, for her private quest to get the nation’s top job.
What other employer allows former employees to access their networks? Companies commonly terminate employees email accounts and access before they even tell them they’ve been let go.
But this isn’t some private company. This is our federal government, an unfathomably large bureaucracy that has a lot of our personal info, top-secret data and so much more in its hands.
By overlooking and explaining away how Hillary Clinton treated government data, including classified information, and then covering up what Imran Awan allegedly did for years in the House, the mainstream media has done a massive disservice to the state of our democracy.
Light needs to be shined on Congress and on anyone who abuses the safeguards of our system so that reforms can take place.
