Hillary's Hypocrisy

Hillary told NBC, "I want to have a much more transparent government...I want to have as much information about the way our government operates on the Internet so the people who pay for it, the taxpayers of America, can see that."

An article in the New York Times, usually an unfailing friend of Hillary's, calls her lack of "transparency" alarming---"difficult to conceive."

An exclusive report out yesterday reveals the depth of Hillary's Hypocrisy.


In 2008, Hillary promised NBC's Face The Nation a Hillary presidency would be a very transparent one.

But America chose Barack.

Now, in her second shot at the highest office in the land, she continues to imply that she will be transparent, but communicates her commitment to transparency in more muted, nuanced ways.

And for good reason. The world knows she is not transparent, nor is her record of so-called "public service."

Last spring, a New York Times article said Clinton never even acquired an official government account for her emails, reporting this as "highly unusual" and "alarming"---more an act of hypocrisy than transparency.

Now the world knows all that.

What we may not know, but should know, is how deep the hypocrisy actually runs---how cunning the deception.

A citizen researcher, Larry Kawa, has provided the most clear cut, documented evidence of how deep Hillary's hypocrisy actually runs in matters related to her "public service."

He has given all his research and discovery to Breitbart News, who published it yesterday.

Even to those of us who carefully observe these matters, it is stunning. The personal depth of her own web of deception toward the American public is stunning, while the complicit and inept way in which the government has handled the matter is deeply disappointing.

There is much detail in the report that is linked above. I encourage you to read the entire article.

Here is a summary:

The State Department has confirmed on State Department letterhead that Hillary did "not" sign a mandatory OF-109 "Separation Agreement" when she left the State Department.

That statement would have required her to affirm that she had returned all classified materials in her possession. Her top aide, Cheryl Mills, also avoided signing a separation agreement.

Additionally, Clinton never certified that she went through a mandatory security debriefing to learn how to handle classified information.

Meanwhile, State Department officials now admit they "mistakenly" mailed out sensitive information involving the Clinton case to a citizen researcher.

Clinton did sign a "Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement" know as a SF-312, but she is also required to sign the OF-109 document.

The State Department Foreign Affairs Manuel requires all employees to sign it on their departure---including the Secretary, because one document is linked to the other in assuring the proper handling of classified information.

Her failure to sign the one, but sign the other gives her the ability to say she signed the documents because she signed the SF-312, while she never signed the OF-109, nor did her top aide.

It is the OF-109 that carries the bite in a case like this, not the SF-312.

This is why the office of the Speaker of the House and others have been trying to get to the bottom of all this and find out if she actually signed that particular document.

Now we know. She didn't. But she can say she "did" sign a document.

Initially, the State Department told Kawa that as Secretary of State, Hillary was exempt.

Kawa kept digging and found that the State Department Manuel is crystal clear on the matter. When he went back to the State Department, they told him Hillary was exempt because of certain existing issues.

He then asked for written documentation that allows for her exemption. They replied, "Mr. Kawa, I do not have this information at hand" and asked him to present another request. He did, but it never received a response.

Kawa then asked State Department Office of Information Programs and Services litigation and appeals branch chief Brandi Garrett for the "pertinent exemption" that would have allowed Clinton to skip out on signing a separation agreement--- Garrett said there wasn't any.

They did provide a Separation Statement for top Clinton aide Cheryl Mills and quietly made it public.

Kawa and others were jarred when they noticed the statement had never been signed by Mills or anyone else. It was left blank.

However, unlike Mills, Clinton aide Huma Abedin signed both a separation agreement and a security debriefing acknowledgement.

If brought to court, Abedin would be more vulnerable than Clinton or Mills on this issue.

Last November, Kawa received an email from Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Martha Grafeld. The same night he received a voicemail from State Department information officer John Hackett. Both Grafeld and Hackett told Kawa they had accidentally mailed him sensitive information about Clinton and her aides, even though Kawa had not received anything from them. He said they seemed panicked.

They both warned him not to share any of the information with anyone, but to return it immediately to the State Department and sent him a self addressed envelope in which to do so.

Clinton's decision not to sign the OF-109 is significantly important in light of the SF-312 agreement.

Clinton violated her sworn SF-312 statement and could have violated other statements in the agreement.

However, Clinton did not sign the second line on the bottom of the SF-312 document, the "Security Debriefing Acknowledgement"---that signature line was left blank. Thus, Clinton did not certify that she was debriefed on her security obligations regarding classified information, therefore, in effect, she has not actually told a lie.

How all this ends will ultimately rest with how much Congress wants to get to the truth.

I'm reminded of the wisdom of a truly great president who correctly noted:

"You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time."--Abraham Lincoln.

Both Kawa and Breitbart News have asked the Clinton campaign for a comment on this report. The campaign has not responded.

Be Informed. Be Vigilant. Be Discerning.