As Americans learn of the contents of Hillary Clinton’s long-hidden emails, it becomes more and more evident as to why Mrs. Clinton fought so hard to keep her emails hidden from congressional investigators.
Not only do the emails paint a picture of an unstable woman with a shaky grasp on her duties as Secretary of State, but the emails reveal nearly a thousand lies she has told and paint a picture of outright criminality.
Clinton’s dereliction of duty and series of poor choices led to the predictable deaths of four Americans in Benghazi. Her and President Obama’s cover-up in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks further added to the shamefulness of the affair and in emails recently (and begrudgingly) released by the State Department to congressional investigators, it appears that not only did Clinton transmit national security secrets over an unsecured email serve nearly 1,000 times, but that when dealing with congressional investigators concerning her complicity in the murders of four Americans, she and her advisers were seemingly more-concerned with her own vanity and personal appearance than the very-serious subject matters at hand.
The State Department begrudgingly complied with congressional demands and released another round of Clinton emails– 328 of which were deemed to have been emails that contained classified material and which were transmitted over an unsecured, private server.
With these emails, the total number of times Clinton transmitted such classified materials over an unsecured server has reached 999 in total. The number is likely to continue to climb as congressional investigators probe deeper and force the State Department to comply with multiple legal orders to do so.
The RNC noted that the high number of emails containing classified material “underscores the degree to which Hillary Clinton jeopardized our national security and has tried to mislead the American people.”
Several of the released emails concern Clinton’s now-infamous hearing appearance in January 2013 where, under intense questioning, Clinton flippantly responded to a question about the dead Americans and terrorist motivations, saying, “What difference, at this point, does it make?!”
Rather than address the seriousness of the tragedy or the intensity of the inquiry to find justice, Huma Abedin, Clinton’s then-chief of staff and current Clinton campaign adviser, congratulated Clinton on her personal appearance.
“I’m being flooded with emails about how you rocked,” Abedin wrote. “And you looked fabulous.”
Of course, the emails show the low regard in which the Clinton camp held the men who died for their country and serves as a sobering illustration of a truly sociopathic emphasis on personal advancement that drowns-out any semblance of compassion or sense of responsibility for the role Clinton played in the deaths of these Americans who died waiting for help that had long been denied and that would never come.
The emails also reveal that Clinton and her staff were promptly informed about the true nature of the attack and the deaths. Though Clinton, Obama and former Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice orchestrated a fabricated narrative concerning a spontaneous protest over a YouTube video that got out-of-hand, the emails reveal that Clinton and her staff were immediately aware of the orchestrated terrorist attack and she even emailed to her daughter that Stevens had been killed “by an al-Qaida-like group.”
Truly, the question no longer can be “should Hillary Clinton be president?” The topic of discussion really should center on when we should assemble a grand jury to pursue charges against the disgraced former secretary of state and any who aided her in the cover-up of her role in these deaths.