hillary allows immigrant housekeeper to handle top secret documents

By 32 Comments 1,055 views



Is there anyone hillary clinton doesn’t make top secret information available to?

barack obama, loretta lynch and hillary clinton have created a disastrous situation for the country. There is now proof that hillary violated the Espionage Act that the Department of Justice is totally corrupt. It is why there will be no indictment of hillary and why we will be facing a Constitutional crisis.

hillary clinton is a criminal. Of that there is absolutely no doubt. Many others have suffered greatly for actions far less offensive. In order to conduct her clandestine self-enrichment schemes clinton made certain there was no Inspector General– no watchdog- around while she was SoS.

Even today the her offenses continue to pile up. She failed to report a $1 million gift from Qatar to the Clinton Foundation despite signing a pledge to do so. clinton apparently sent her daughter Chelsea classified information on a routine basis. Astonishingly, she had her maid print out classified documents on a daily basis.

As secretary of state, Hillary Clinton routinely asked her maid to print out sensitive government e-mails and documents — including ones containing classified information — from her house in Washington, DC, e-mails and FBI memos show. But the housekeeper lacked the security clearance to handle such material.

In fact, Marina Santos was called on so frequently to receive e-mails that she may hold the secrets to E-mailgate — if only the FBI and Congress would subpoena her and the equipment she used.

Clinton entrusted far more than the care of her DC residence, known as Whitehaven, to Santos. She expected the Filipino immigrant to handle state secrets, further opening the Democratic presidential nominee to criticism that she played fast and loose with national security.

clinton even gave Santos access to her SCIF:

Santos also had access to a highly secure room called an SCIF (sensitive compartmented information facility) that diplomatic security agents set up at Whitehaven, according to FBI notes from an interview with Abedin.

From within the SCIF, Santos — who had no clearance — “collected documents from the secure facsimile machine for Clinton,” the FBI notes revealed.

This is a clearcut violation of the Espionage Act:

In fact, the espionage act—which regulates the handling of intelligence by government officials — does not refer to classified information; it refers to information relating to the national defense. Moreover, it does not prohibit solely the transmission of such information; it criminalizes the communication, delivery, or transmission of that information; causing communication, delivery, or transmission of that information; permitting the removal of that information from its proper place of custody through gross negligence; permitting that information to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed through gross negligence; or, failing to make a prompt report to superiors in the government when an official knows that the information has been removed from its proper place of custody, communicated to someone not authorized to have it, lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed. See also Title 18 United States Code Section 2071(prohibiting destruction of records).

It is also a textbook definition of mishandling classified information:

(a)Whoever knowingly and willfully communicates, furnishes, transmits, or otherwise makes available to an unauthorized person, or publishes, or uses in any manner prejudicial to the safety or interest of the United States or for the benefit of any foreign government to the detriment of the United States any classified information—


concerning the nature, preparation, or use of any code, cipher, or cryptographic system of the United States or any foreign government; or


concerning the design, construction, use, maintenance, or repair of any device, apparatus, or appliance used or prepared or planned for use by the United States or any foreign government for cryptographic or communication intelligence purposes; or


concerning the communication intelligence activities of the United States or any foreign government; or


obtained by the processes of communication intelligence from the communications of any foreign government, knowing the same to have been obtained by such processes—
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both

Some key notes from the Post article:

It also appears the FBI did not formally interview Santos as a key witness in its investigation.

Most likely because the DOJ would not allow it. And this:

In addition to Abedin, Santos worked closely with Hanley at Whitehaven and could shed light on the mystery — if only she were asked about it.

Again- the DOJ likely forbade it. Prediction: If Congress subpoenas Santos, DOJ will immunize her ahead of time and she will plead the 5th.

The crisis arrives when the DOJ refuses to convene Grand Juries and immunizes all the witnesses and the FBI leaks its proof directly to the public. This is worse than Watergate.
Way worse.

UPDATE- I revised the title.





DrJohn has been a health care professional for more than 30 years. In addition to clinical practice he has done extensive research and has published widely with over 70 original articles and abstracts in the peer-reviewed literature. DrJohn is well known in his field and has lectured on every continent except for Antarctica. He has been married to the same wonderful lady for over 30 years and has three kids- two sons, both of whom are attorneys and one daughter on her way into the field of education. DrJohn was brought up with the concept that one can do well if one is prepared to work hard but nothing in life is guaranteed. Except for liberals being foolish.

32 Responses to “hillary allows immigrant housekeeper to handle top secret documents”

  1. 1


    She whines about the Trump foundation, this email is in reference to her daughter who wears an inverted cross openly
    We know she broke the law with her mishandling of classified information we know she was involved with highly unsavory characters
    But the clintons wouldnt put a crowbar in their wallet to pay for their own daughters wedding,and Chelsea living off the foundation for years.
    Shut it down.

  2. 4

    Nanny G

    Yeah, but…..she said she was sorry…..and, that she wouldn’t do it again.
    What more can you ask of her?

    OK, sarcasm off.
    There are 330 million Americans plus immigrants in the US now.
    Under Hillary another 800 million would be welcomed.
    The estimated tax PER YEAR on every household to support her world-wide-welfare program is $15,000.
    Per Year.
    Do you have an ”extra” $15,000 annually to cough up so we can ”welcome” a near-tripling of our population here?

  3. 5

    July 4th American


    Many say we will be in a Constitutional crisis post election should mrs clinton win.

    I argue we are presently in a Constitutional crisis as two of the branches of the government have violated their oaths to the Constitution. The Justice department is in full cover up mode with respect to the clinton debacle. And the executive branch has instructed the justice department to not fully investigate and indict the criminal activity.

    Those on the left and the media perpetuate the situation by putting themselves and party first. Does any rational thinking person not think that were the party affiliations reversed that this would be all we would see and hear? It would certainly be the case I can assure you.

    Those we have entrusted to uphold our laws have abrogated their solemn responsibility as they too have put self interest above the rule of law.

  4. 7

    Bill… Deplorable Me

    So here’s a new scenario. One of the entities that the FBI are certain hacked Hillary’s emails wait until she is sworn in and they release some of the emails of hers they have, providing irrefutable evidence she violated the Espionage Act. Then, Congress, if it is not in the hands of Democrats (and therefore as corrupt as the DOJ is now) undertakes impeachment proceedings. The government is tied up in turmoil for months; possibly years.

    All because liberals supported a known criminal.

  5. 9


    Perhaps Dr J is unaware of the duties of the POTUS. The POTUS doe not “indict” that is the job of a grand jury.
    And Bill it will not be Democrats that elect Clinton, that will be done by how many self identified Independents vote for her.
    How is this for a question: there is now documentary proof that Melania worked as a model while on a tourist visa. This would put her citizenship in doubt. Should she lose her US citizenship and be deported?

  6. 11


    @Nanny G:
    Nanny the TOTAL US population is around 330 million https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demography_of_the_United_States
    The undocumented population has DECREASED under Obama
    How much did the taxes YOU pay go up under Obama?http://www.cbpp.org/research/federal-income-taxes-on-middle-income-families-remain-near-historic-lows
    Nanny you ARE entitled to your own opinions, but not your own “facts”

  7. 12


    The FBI has reaffirmed that it has not reopened the Clinton email investigation.

    Emails Warrant No New Action Against Hillary Clinton, F.B.I. Director Says

    The F.B.I. informed Congress on Sunday that it has not changed its conclusions about Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server as secretary of state, removing a dark cloud that has been hanging over her campaign two days before Election Day.

    James B. Comey, the F.B.I. director, said in a letter to members of Congress that “based on our review, we have not changed our conclusions that we expressed in July with respect to Secretary Clinton.”

    The meaning of this letter should be a bit harder to misrepresent.

    Reports are coming in that the newly discovered emails appear to be duplicates of emails previously reviewed and personal emails, but that detail hasn’t been officially confirmed by the FBI.

  8. 14

    Nanny G

    I’m sure all students who put off studying until the last moment want some tips from Comey.
    The 30,000 emails took his FBI almost a full year to ”study.”
    But that same FBI managed to read (comb through) all 650,000 emails in less than 10 days!

  9. 17


    @Nanny G, #9:

    The 30,000 emails took his FBI almost a full year to ”study.”

    It would take very little time to determine if new material duplicates what you previously had, even if the volume is very large. Since email files are digital, a computer can make such a comparison in minutes. It could just as quickly set out for examination anything that is not a perfect match. Examination and analysis would take months only if it turned out that most of the material actually was new.

  10. 18

    July 4th American


    My guess is the department of Injustice put the clamps on this going anywhere because the o’boner in chief is mixed up in this and that would destroy the legacy of the fist black potus.

    I am curious however as to what the FBI might do about the foundation investigation. If they back off of that, the NYPD should proceed with throwing the book at Weiner.

  11. 19

    Bill… Deplorable Me

    So now Comey is not a Republican stooge again? Liberals flipping and flopping on who they despise is going to give them the runs.

  12. 20


    Comey is nobody’s stooge. He never reported that the investigation had been reopened in the first place. His previous letter made it clear that the newly discovered emails might be duplicates, or of no significance to the prior investigation.

    Comey’s problem is that there’s a rogue element in the FBI that does have a partisan agenda, and has been making unauthorized leaks and anonymous statements while citing the FBI connection to give them an air of unwarranted credibililty. The proximity of the election has put Comey in a position where he must make clarifying statements, but every statement he makes is at the risk of being viewed as taking sides. I feel sorry for the guy. He’s just a public servant trying to do his job the best he can.

  13. 21

    Bill… Deplorable Me

    @Greg: He never reported it was CLOSED, either. And, he still hasn’t. I, too, pity Comey. I do not believe that his agents are enraged simply because they are anti-Hillary. They have seen the evidence and they are enraged justice is not being served; HILLARY is being served. I feel for those guys as well.

    It’s not that big a deal, anyway. No committed liberal would change their view of Hillary simply because of a little indictment or something trivial like that. They will support her crimes, lies, corruption, incompetence and all.

  14. 25


    @john: It aint over til its over. America is so done with you and your ilk, name calling sooo mature, just means you have no sane debate points.
    She should be able to have her day in court and be able to prove her innocence.
    I’m going to vote.

  15. 26

    Richard Wheeler

    @kitt: Favorite bumper sticker I’ve seen.
    “VoteTrump. Nobody Has To Know”

    Think Trump lost this with his Latino comments on DAY ONE—just ask my wife.
    Huge Latino turnout in Fla. Nevada and Colorado will send him back to his Penthouse.
    I’m giving Fla.to HRC 301-237 HRC 49 DT 46
    Rubio tepid support of Trump allows him to get nom in 2020 and still get Latino vote and election in Fla tomorrow.
    It’ll be 5 0’CLOCK somewhere early tomorrow—

  16. 29


    Hillary Clinton had such contempt for national security rules that Paul Sperry, a well respected writer for the New York Post, sourcing unnamed “e-mails and FBI memos,” writes that the Filipina immigrant maid:

    …was called on so frequently to receive e-mails that she may hold the secrets to E-mailgate — if only the FBI and Congress would subpoena her and the equipment she used.

    Sourcing unnamed e-mails and FBI memos? I would respond with You’ve got to be kidding, but no…this sort of garbage “journalism” has evidently become the norm in the final hours before the election. Any anti-Clinton accusation is rolled out and received as the truth.

    The claims of this bogus article have been been picked up and repeated by conservative outlets such as American Thinker. An article that makes accusations with no named source itself becomes a primary source. How did we get to this point?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *