Hillary Clinton Lied - FBI Director Comey Said So ... 2

So despite what FBI Director James Comey stated in his press conference on Monday and later what he testified before Congress on Thursday, we still learned critically important and irrefutable facts about the Democratic Party candidate for the presidency of the United States of America. Regardless, and despite the mainstream media spin, left-wing pundits, and her loyalist, it is devastating.

Over the last year, Hillary Clinton repeatedly lied to Congress while under oath, lied in her response to questions during Presidential debates, lied during interviews with the news media, and lied to the American people on how she handled classified official intelligence information, ranging from Secret, Top Secret – Sensitive Compartmented Information, even that information pertaining to what is known as Special Access Programs or SAPs, the most sensitive. Furthermore, she and her staff removed that information from highly secure national security computers, a violation of Federal law, and the secure facilities where those computers were housed. To make matters worse, she placed that information into her private E-mails that were transmitted and received on her unclassified own multiple private servers located in the basement of her home, that were managed by her own IT people on a non-secure, non-protected, non-shielded network.

Hillary Clinton also lied in her testimony while under oath to Congress, about the “Radical Islamic Terrorists “who attacked the U.S. Mission in Benghazi, Libya. She also lied to the families of the 4 dead Americans who were killed in Benghazi, within close proximity to their American Flag draped caskets, immediately after their bodies arrived at the Delaware Air Force Base, Delaware. Further, she repeatedly lied to the American people and the news media, when she said the attack on the U.S. Mission in Benghazi was the result of a demonstration against a YouTube video that went bad, when on the night of the attack, she told her daughter that the attack was conducted by an al-Qaeda affiliated terrorist group.

After many years as a practicing attorney, 8-years as a First Lady (to which she required a security clearance), 8-years as a U.S. Senator, 4-years as the Secretary of State, which she as a Principle member of the National Security Council (which carries with it access to some of the most sensitive and highly classified information in the intelligence community), Hillary had been repeatedly briefed and required to execute proof of her knowledge and understanding, under penalty of perjury, on how to handle classified material. Hillary very well knew that in transmitting and receiving classified E-mails and intelligence information on an unclassified server, that she was violating U.S. Federal Laws.

In his testimony before Congress, the FBI Director alleges Hillary Clinton did not know what she was doing when she was violating Federal Laws; if that is true, it goes to her lack of “competence”. This alone has demonstrated that she is “incompetent” to ever be trusted to handle classified material again. Ever!


FBI Director Comey told the American people that the FBI did a “comprehensive” investigation of whether Hillary Clinton violated U.S. Federal Laws. He said Hillary had “No Intent”, even though he knew she had repeatedly lied while she was under oath in her sworn testimony to Congress on her handling of classified material. By lying to Congress under oath, she perjured herself, which was evidence of her “Intent” to mislead and deceive Congress and the American people about the details of how she received and transmitted Secret, Top Secret-Sensitive Compartmented and SAPs via her illegal private Email network on the unclassified, unsecure server in the basement of her home.

Most Americans fully understand that perjury in a testimony before Congress, while under oath, is a violation of U.S. Federal law, making it a felony – a federal crime.

Further, Hillary Clinton’s interview with the FBI was not conducted in the same process and manner that all other suspects in a criminal case are interviewed, particularly one of this stature and level of criminality involved. FBI Director Comey not only did not attend the 3 ½ half hour, very short interview of Hillary Clinton, but incredulously, he did not ensure she was put “Under Oath”, did not ensure the interview was “recorded”, and did not require to have a “transcript” taken of the interview for retention by the FBI, in order to maintain a record…a federal requirement in itself. Before the FBI Director ruled against referring Hillary Clinton’s case for criminal prosecution, Director Comey did not even speak to the 5 or 6 FBI Agents who interviewed Hillary on a Saturday over the 4th of July weekend.

The FBI Director’s decision not to recommend the indictment of Hillary Clinton, negatively affected the view of millions of Americans, who developed the impression that there is no equality in the “Rule of Law”. At a minimum, the way FBI Director Comey had the FBI handle the interview of Hillary Clinton, it also led the American people to believe there are two sets of rules for enforcing U.S. Federal Laws. There is one for Hillary Clinton and the privileged elitist and another for other average Americans, who have been previously prosecuted, convicted, and jailed for doing far less than what Hillary Clinton did, in their own handling and securing of classified material.

After the FBI Director Comey laid out the predicate on how Hillary Clinton repeatedly violated U.S. Federal Laws over a 4-year period, then he drew an erroneous conclusion when he said “no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case” because she had no “Intent.” Hillary’s “Intent” was proven when she repeatedly lied to Congress, about how she had and was handling classified material. However, thousands of Americans are currently serving prison sentences for mishandling classified material, and in many of their cases, “Intent” was never proven. “Intent” is not required to convict someone for violating U.S. Federal Laws governing the handling and securing of classified material and intelligence information. Even gross negligence need not be a factor, even though that was clearly evident with Mrs. Clinton as well as her staff.

Hillary Clinton and her staff, who were involved in improperly handling extremely sensitive compartmented intelligence information (including information and emails classified above Top Secret), were incredibly reckless, and they should never be allowed to handle classified material again, as long as they walk this earth.

That alone would preclude Hillary Clinton from ever serving as President of the United
States of America.

Hillary Clinton’s case should have been referred to the Justice Department for indictment, so that the Justice Department could have referred her case to a Grand Jury, in order to allow the Grand Jury to make the decision. If Hillary Clinton were a member of the U.S. military or a federal civilian employee with a U.S. Government security clearance serving within the national security community and had violate the laws and directives that pertain to the handling of classified material, she would have lost her security clearance, would have been faced with criminal prosecution, and would have loss pay and in many cases be serving time in a federal penitentiary, particularly for the violations Mrs. Clinton and her staff committed. It should noted, Director Comey prosecuted and convicted members of the U.S. Navy for mishandling classified material, without having to prove “Intent.”

The U.S. Attorney General gave Hillary a pass on prosecution for her gross violation of mishandling classified material over a 4-year period, in violation of Federal Laws governing the handling of classified material; it was an extremely bad day for the American Justice System, the process of law, American Security, and the Constitution of the United States of America.

[Please Note: Colonel Waurishuk is VP of the Special Ops-OPSEC Foundation, an organization of former special operations and professional intelligence officers.  The organization conducted the behind the scenes deep research and analysis for the Congressman Trey Gowdy’s House Select Committee on Benghazi, as well as Congressman Frank Wolf’s committee prior U.S. House Benghazi Investigations committee.]

Jim Waurishuk is a retired USAF Colonel, serving nearly 30-years as a career senior intelligence and political-military affairs officer and special mission intelligence officer with expertise in strategic intelligence, international strategic studies and policy, and asymmetric warfare. He served combat and combat-support tours in Grenada, Panama, Iraq, and Afghanistan, as well as on numerous special operations and special mission intelligence contingencies in Central America, Eastern Europe, the Middle East, Central Asia and Africa. He served as a special mission intelligence officer assigned to multiple Joint Special Operations units, and with the CIA’s Asymmetric Warfare Task Force, as well as in international and foreign advisory positions. He served as Deputy Director for Intelligence for U.S. Central Command (USCENTCOM) during the peak years of the wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, and the Global War on Terrorism. He is a former White House National Security Council staffer and a former Distinguished Senior Fellow with the Atlantic Council, Washington, D.C. He served as a senior advisor to the Commander U.S. Special Operations Command (USSOCOM) and is Vice President of the Special Ops-OPSEC -- which provides strategic and operational security analysis and assessments to governmental and private entities, as well as media organizations on national security issues, policy, and processes. He currently provides advisory and consulting services on national security, international strategic policy, and strategy assessments for the U.S. and foreign private sector and governments entities, media groups and outlets, and to political groups, forums, and political candidates. He is an author and writer providing regular commentary and opinion to national and local TV, radio networks, and for both print and online publications, as well as speaking engagements to business, political, civic and private groups on national security matters – focusing on international strategic policy and engagement, and strategic intelligence, and subject matter expertise on special mission intelligence and operations, counter-terrorism, and asymmetric warfare and conflict.