A former CIA official, a former attorney general, and Judge Napolitano have a serious and devastating message for Hillary Clinton – an indictment will most likely be recommended.
There is “zero ambiguity” here, former CIA official Charles Faddis said on Fox News’ America’s Newsroom Wednesday morning. SAPs (secure data from secure access programs) are not ambiguous. Mr. Faddis said if he did it, he would have lost his clearance, lost his job, and gone to prison.
The reason this information is in this channel [top, top secret] is because it will do “enormous damage” if it gets out. It will “without question” cost lives, he added.
Judge Napolitano said “it’s hard to believe” she won’t be indicted with this overwhelming evidence of “mishandling of classified information”.
We don’t know what’s in the SAPs, but it is the highest category there is and the type of information could include the names of moles, the names of people in secret government programs, Black Ops and so on, Judge Napolitano revealed on Fox News. The fact that she signed the NDA (non-disclosure agreement) and was instructed on it but still put it on a private server makes her a “prime candidate for prosecution.”
Like Petraeus, who was convicted of one of the same crimes she appears to have committed, she signed the non-disclosure agreement (NDA). She signed the NDA on January 22, 2009 and by signing, she agreed to protect the highly classified information or risk criminal prosecution.
“I have been advised that any breach of this Agreement may result in my termination of my access to SCI (Sensitive Compartmented Information) and removal from a position of special confidence,” the NDA reads.
“I have been advised that any authorized disclosure of SCI by me may constitute violations of United States criminal laws, including provisions of Sections 793, 794, 798 and 952, Title 18 United States Code…” These are provisions of the Espionage Act, and as Fox recently reported, 18 USC 793 subsection (f) is of special interest to the FBI investigation as it includes “gross negligence” in the handling of national defense information.
How does she escape prosecution from this?
If the FBI does nothing, their reputation will be destroyed and it will never be the same.
A former Attorney General said that if she were a regular employee, she would have been prosecuted by now. She is in “big, legal trouble”, he said.