On Friday, because of the ongoing investigation into Hilary Clinton, the State Department released another 1500 of her emails from the time she served as Secretary of State. 88 of them were considered “confidential” which is the lowest level of security classification. The topics covered in the emails included the CIA torture program, the Keystone pipeline, US-Israel relations, the Arab Spring in Egypt, the death of Osama Bin Laden, climate change, Guantanamo detainees, and document leaks from Wikileaks (Source). Already, the State Department has classified more than 1800 of Clinton’s emails; 24 of which are top secret, the highest level of classification, and 21 are considered secret which is an intermediate level of classification. An investigation into her emails, conducted by the FBI, revolved around a potential breach of her handling of classified information. The potential breach is relating to a private email account she used exclusively to conduct official business from her home in New York (Source).
The investigation into Clinton’s emails has been highly publicized because Clinton is currently on the campaign trail trying to secure votes to win the Democratic nomination for president. She still is expected to secure the Democratic nomination eventually, but Bernie Sanders has been gaining ground in the race. The Senator from Vermont won the New Hampshire primary and has a “virtual tie” with Hilary nationally, according to a new Quinnipiac University poll (Source). However, Hilary’s trustworthiness has regularly been low among potential voters and many wonder if the investigation is going to hurt her status as the favorite for the nomination.
Adam Levin, of ABC news, says he does not believe the email controversy, also know as “Emailgate”, reflects a deal-breaking character flaw in Clinton. Justifying his statements, Levin contends Hilary is not the first Secretary of State to engage in this type of risking behavior. Furthermore, he somewhat defends Clinton due to the fact there is an increased attention to cybersecurity and the threat it presents to the country. In fact, 19 billion dollars will be allocated to cybersecurity for the next fiscal year; a 35% increase from the previous year (Source). Similarly, Stephen Vladeck of the New York Times does not see this as a damning characteristic because, realistically, she will not be criminally charged. He makes the claim Hilary Clinton will only be truly prosecuted through the ballot box (Source). In other words, the American people are going to be the prosecutors of Hilary Clinton.
However, Attorney General Loretta Lynch confirmed Department of Justice attorneys are working with FBI agents on Clinton’s email practices. This development suggests the investigation has progressed, giving agents access to the government’s full investigative tools such as having the ability to subpoena individuals (Source). Also, it has been reported Loretta Lynch was pressed by Congressman John Carter about addressing the possibility of pressing charges.
Andrew McCarthy of the New York Times believes there is ample reason to believe there was wrongdoing in Clinton’s part. He cites the redaction of hundreds of emails which indicate classified information was improperly handled and Clinton initially claiming there was no classified material on the server (Source).
The Clinton campaign commented on the matter and her campaign spokesman, Brian Fallon asserted: “This is overclassification run amok. We adamantly oppose the complete blocking of the release of these emails”(Source).
Bias aside, I think it is up to the individual person to determine if Hilary Clinton is trustworthy or not. Classified material may have passed through the her private server, but has she really been the only one to do something like this? Is it possible there are external forces driving the Clinton investigation in the name of a political agenda? These are questions that need to be considered on an individual level because we, the people, are the ones potentially electing her to office. All it takes is a little bit of research to come to your own conclusions about an issue and that applies immensely here. I am not going to sit here and tell you what to make of the situation because that is what mainstream news outlets try to do. Presenting the facts and making sound conclusions based on your own knowledge is what news is all about. So, take the facts I have presented here, and you decide if Hilary Clinton is worth your vote or not.
Contributed by R.A.