We live in a world where the FBI’s James Comey spent one year investigating Hillary Clinton’s private servers, and emails, only to conclude that her original “convenience” excuse wasn’t criminal. If this means Clinton is qualified according to President Obama, then he’s changed the definition of “qualified” just like Comey altered the meaning of “intent.” However, there’s a woman running for president in 2016 who never owned a private server, or endured an FBI investigation. Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party is far more qualified than Hillary Clinton to keep America’s secrets safe, as illustrated by James Comey’s Congressional testimony.
Quoted in POLITICO, Comey’s testimony to Congress made the following assessments of Clinton’s email practices:
He added, “I think she was extremely careless. I think she was negligent. That I could establish. What we can’t establish that she acted with the necessary criminal intent.
“Certainly she should have known not to send classified information,” Comey said. “As I said, that’s the definition of negligent. I think she was extremely careless. I think she was negligent. That I could establish. What we can’t establish is that she acted with the necessary criminal intent.”
The FBI director not only said Clinton should have known not to send classified information, but “As I said, that’s the definition of negligent.” He also stated Clinton was “extremely careless.”
Clinton’s only saving grace was that she didn’t willingly jeopardize national security. However, CNN has an array of Comey statements that paint a frightening picture of Clinton’s email practices. The following statements are found in a CNN piece titled FBI boss Comey’s 7 most damning lines on Clinton:
“Extremely careless”
“Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.”
“Should have known”
“There is evidence to support a conclusion that any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position, or in the position of those with whom she was corresponding about those matters, should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation.”
“Especially concerning”
“None of these emails should have been on any kind of unclassified system, but their presence is especially concerning because all of these emails were housed on unclassified personal servers not even supported by full-time security staff, like those found at agencies and departments of the United States government ― or even with a commercial email service like Gmail.”
“Still obligated to protect it”
“Only a very small number of the emails containing classified information bore markings indicating the presence of classified information. But even if information is not marked ‘classified’ in an email, participants who know or should know that the subject matter is classified are still obligated to protect it.”
“Hostile actors”
“We do assess that hostile actors gained access to the private commercial email accounts of people with whom Secretary Clinton was in regular contact from her personal account. We also assess that Secretary Clinton’s use of a personal email domain was both known by a large number of people and readily apparent.”
“Sophisticated adversaries”
“She also used her personal email extensively while outside the United States, including sending and receiving work-related emails in the territory of sophisticated adversaries. Given that combination of factors, we assess it is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton’s personal email account.”
Yes, Donald Trump is a buffoon who should never have asked Russia to hack emails. But Clinton actually put this classified information at risk, potentially allowing “sophisticated adversaries” to hack into her servers.
Are there “hostile actors” and “sophisticated adversaries” capable of hacking a Blackberry the NSA denied Clinton authorization to use?
Was Julian Assange or Donald Trump “extremely careless” and “negligent” with a private email server as Secretary of State?
No, it was Hillary Clinton, who still rejects the claim that she was “careless” with emails.
Then, there’s the reality that her server was likely breached, as illustrated in a New York Times piece titled Hillary Clinton’s Email Was Probably Hacked, Experts Say:
When the F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, said on Tuesday that his investigators had no “direct evidence” that Hillary Clinton’s email account had been “successfully hacked,” both private experts and federal investigators immediately understood his meaning: It very likely had been breached, but the intruders were far too skilled to leave evidence of their work.
Mr. Comey described, in fairly blistering terms, a set of email practices that left Mrs. Clinton’s systems wide open to Russian and Chinese hackers, and an array of others. She had no full-time cybersecurity professional monitoring her system. She took her BlackBerry everywhere she went, “sending and receiving work-related emails in the territory of sophisticated adversaries.” Her use of “a personal email domain was both known by a large number of people and readily apparent.”
In the end, the risks created by Mrs. Clinton’s insistence on keeping her communications on a private server may prove to be a larger issue than the relatively small amount of classified data investigators said they found on her system. But the central mystery — who got into the system, if anyone — may never be resolved.
“Reading between the lines and following Comey’s logic, it does sound as if the F.B.I. believes a compromise of Clinton’s email is more likely than not,” said Adam Segal, the author of “Hacked World Order,” who studies cyberissues at the Council on Foreign Relations. “Sophisticated attackers would have known of the existence of the account, would have targeted it and would not have been seen.”
Therefore, sophisticated hackers could have easily hacked into Clinton servers, without the FBI or anyone else knowing the extent of the security breach.
Finally, I explain why Stein is infinitely more qualified than Clinton in the following YouTube segment. The fact that Dr. Jill Stein doesn’t have a reason to own a private server points to exactly why she’s more qualified than Clinton. During a Democracy Now interview, Stein offers a vision of the future that is free of any lobbyist influence:
This politics of fear has actually delivered everything we were afraid of. All the reasons you were told you had to vote for the lesser evil—because you didn’t want the massive Wall Street bailouts, the offshoring of our jobs, the meltdown of the climate, the endless expanding wars, the attack on immigrants—all that, we’ve gotten by the droves, because we allowed ourselves to be silenced. You know, silence is not what democracy needs. Right now we have an election where even the supporters of Hillary Clinton, the majority don’t support Hillary, they just oppose Donald Trump. And the majority of Donald Trump supporters don’t support him, they just oppose Hillary. And the majority are clamoring for another independent or several independent candidates and an independent party, and feel that they are being terribly misserved and mistreated by the current politics...
And I’ll just point out, Donald Trump himself is lifted up by a movement which is very much the product of the Clintons’ policies. The lesser evil very much makes inevitable the greater evil, because people don’t come out to vote for a politician that’s throwing them under the bus. And so we see houses of—the houses of Congress, we have also seen statehouse after statehouse, flipping from red to blue over the years as the Democratic Party has become a lesser-evil party. And Donald Trump is buoyed up by the policies passed by Bill Clinton, supported by Hillary—that is, deregulation of Wall Street, which led to the disappearance of 9 million jobs, 5 million people thrown out of their homes, and by NAFTA, which exported those jobs.
Dr. Jill Stein echoes the sentiments of millions who see Clinton and Trump as two sides of the same coin.
As stated by Dr. Stein, the “politics of fear has actually delivered everything we were afraid of.” As president, Jill Stein will be too busy trying to fix America’s problems, as opposed to hiding emails from the American public. While the FBI investigated Clinton’s server, America’s intelligence community won’t have to worry about Jill Stein. Unlike some candidates, Stein isn’t funded by interests who prefer to be hidden in the shadows.
