Security Clearance Lawyer: Clinton's Private Server Violated Husband's Executive Order

Executive Order 12968 – was signed in 1995 by President Bill Clinton

(CNSNews.com) – An attorney who represents federal employees and contractors whose national security clearances have either been denied or revoked said that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server apparently violated guidelines on the handling of classified information established under an executive order signed by her husband, former President Bill Clinton.

"It says: ‘The concern: Deliberate or negligent failure to comply with rules and regulations for protecting classified or other sensitive information raises doubt about an individual’s trustworthiness, judgment, reliability, or willingness and ability to safeguard such information, and is a security concern.’

“'Additions that could raise a security concern and may be disqualifying include, in part, negligent disclosure of classified or other protected information to unauthorized persons. Collecting or storing classified information or other protected information in any unauthorized location. Loading, drafting, editing, modifying, storing,’ etc. etc. the list goes on and on.

“Also relevant in this case is Guideline M, use of information technology systems. That includes ‘all computer hardware, software, firmware, etc. Conditions that could raise a security concern that may be disqualifying include downloading, storing or transmitting classified information on or to any unauthorized software, hardware or information technology system’. Again, not a lot of ambiguity there.”

www.cnsnews.com...

Petition to Suspend Hillary’s Security Clearance Pending the Outcome of Investigations

In order to maintain security Hillary Clinton should not possess a security clearance while being investigated for a security breach issue. Should she be found in fault or guilty of a federal crime she will have been in possession of a security clearance which gives her further opportunity to commit further crimes. It is only reasonable to remove her security clearance for the issue of maintaining American's Security and Safety as well as our classified/confidential information. At least until such a time as the FBI has completed their investigation and any investigation relating to Clinton. Until then her security clearance should be suspended or revoked.

petitions.whitehouse.gov...

Its ironic that Hillary's husband signed the executive order 20 years ago. At the CNSNew Link above there is a video worth watching that I am unable to post here. Does anyone know if Hillary still getting Security Briefings?

When I refresh the Petition Link the number of signatures changes. Can someone verify for me? Thanks in advance..Thoughts?

a reply to: gmoneystunt

I wouldn't say ironic, just classic Clinton protocol (classic politician protocol).

Both sides do it, take a hard line to pander, then pander against it.

a reply to: gmoneystunt

Why does she still have security clearance? She is no longer Sec of State. Am I missing something?

originally posted by: new_here
a reply to: gmoneystunt

Why does she still have security clearance? She is no longer Sec of State. Am I missing something?

Secret level clearance can be active for ten years. Not sure how often the higher levels need to be renewed.

a reply to: collietta

Ok, thanks. TIL.

Secret is 10 years, top secret every 7 years, higher have no clue...

I know someone that all they did was turn on a phone at the wrong time... and they lost their clearance, they did not lose anything, mishandle anything... just had an active phone near classified information.

So all the people telling me its just some emails, frustrate me to a great extent... their career is toast now, and future job opportunities are in jeopardy. While that "woman"... so far has not even received a slap on the wrist... infuriating.

a reply to: Irishhaf

That's a point I think many agree with. Many have been punished, fined or jailed for less.

I find it hard to believe a person with her experience in government would not understand that it was a major breech of protocol.

It's difficult to accept any argument she can make to support it. If a person can't understand and learn simple tasks such as using a computer to send email then what are they doing representing, negotiating and decision making for our government in international matters.

This makes me believe she had motive outside her government position for doing it.

Different rules for elected officials. Heard Gowdy talk about it. The real issue is her staff. They are the ones that need their clearances revoked. They are not elected officials. When you are elected the public trust is your clearance. Not the case with Mills and Huma. I'm sure this issue is being looked at behind the scenes. They will need new clearances but who would be able to approve them? They violated OPSEC laws. Hillary would not be able to approve them.

originally posted by: new_here
a reply to: gmoneystunt

Why does she still have security clearance? She is no longer Sec of State. Am I missing something?

Secretaries of State are allowed to keep their clearances active for life as far as I know.

That however, does not explain why on earth her clearance has not been suspended as of Nov. 3, 2016.