State Department Revokes Security Clearances For Hillary Clinton, Cheryl Mills and Four Additional “Research Aides”…

A statement from Senate Judiciary Committee today outlines a letter received from the U.S. State Department highlighting security ramifications of the ongoing issues of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton -and her staff- transmitting classified information over unsecured networks:

WASHINGTON – The U.S. State Department recently confirmed that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s security clearance has been withdrawn at her request. Clearances for five other individuals whom Clinton designated as researchers have also been withdrawn, including close aide Cheryl Mills, according to the State Department’s update of its ongoing review of the mishandling of classified information related to the use of Clinton’s non-government email server.

Documents containing classified material have been sent to the Bureau of Diplomatic Security, and all valid security incidents have been added to the security file for some individuals.  Department authorities are continuing to review tens of thousands of documents for classified content.

The update was provided to Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley and is being released for the first time following consultation with the State Department.  The update follows a letter from the Department in May of 2017 confirming the Department’s review into any mishandling of classified information stemming from the use of Clinton’s non-government email server.  That letter, which responded to an inquiry from Grassley, also outlined the review and adjudication process. (LINK)

Here’s the letter from the State Department:

(Source pdf)

This entry was posted in Big Government, Big Stupid Government, Clinton(s), Conspiracy ?, Deep State, Dem Hypocrisy, Desperately Seeking Hillary, Election 2018, media bias, Notorious Liars, propaganda, Secretary of State, Typical Prog Behavior, Uncategorized, White House Coverup. Bookmark the permalink.

404 Responses to State Department Revokes Security Clearances For Hillary Clinton, Cheryl Mills and Four Additional “Research Aides”…

  1. Have Gun Will Travel says:

    Looks like she requested her clearance to be removed (@30 Aug) shortly after Brennan had his revoked involuntarily (@15 Aug). I’d be certain she did it to prevent the embarrassment and future political damage of having it revoked involuntarily – as a result of mishandling classified Information (per DoS investigation), or removed by Pres Trump for same reasons as revoking Brennan’s.
    Her aide and “researchers” are a different story – they had clearances removed by state (and recently).

    Liked by 17 people

    • Sunshine says:

      Six weeks ago, she willingly debased herself although she surely has friends in the background.

      I would call it a slow death by a 1,000 cuts as of Donald J. Trump’s election.People keep claiming ”Lock her up”.

      Between the Russia hoax and the Clinton Foundation and the Clinton Global Initiative and whatever else, regardless of how much money you have and the power you wield, things do fall apart if you’re a crook.

      SLOW JUSTICE even if you’re not indicted.

      Liked by 11 people

    • vexedmi says:

      But it makes no difference whatever for the simple fact that Billy, her hubby, gets a daily security brief daily. There will be a lot of: “You can see after me Bill.”

      Liked by 2 people

    • dman1971 says:

      I have spent decades in Intel. There is no provision to “surrender” a clearance. A clearance does not belong to the individual it belongs to the gov’t. All of them were revoked. They are making it look like it was voluntarily surrendered for a reason. Think counter intel ops. You do not want to spook the spooks.

      Liked by 2 people

  2. bearsgrrr says:

    Anyone remember the video of Huma and Lindsey Graham at McCain’s funeral? Hillary “gave up” her clearance August 30, just after he died. I wonder what the message Huma passed to Graham and if it was related. Hmmm

    Liked by 4 people

    • Deplorable_Infidel says:

      “I wonder what the message Huma passed to Graham”

      It was a funeral!

      Does absolutely EVERYTHING have to have some mysterious, nefarious connotation to it? If so, please feel free to go into a closet with a tinfoil hat.

      Liked by 3 people

      • formercrookcountyresident says:

        They clearly had an “interesting” conversation! Did you see this? Why did Sen. Graham go over to talk to Kelly after Kelly made the hand signal “I’m watching you”?

        Liked by 3 people

        • josco scott says:

          This was DEFINITELY not a “tin foil hat” moment… and as the Left is using “conspiracy theorist” instead of making arguments, I care even less about defending against that.

          There were far too many people involved not to have it mean something… but have no idea what.
          Love to know!

          Liked by 5 people

          • CNN_sucks says:

            TGP was worst in reporting this. Clinton gave up her security clearance but by reading the headline you think the opposite. Sometimes, TGP engaged in hyperbole as if we are not stimulated enough. Stay away from the computer!


            • Beth says:

              The networks emphasized that she gave it up “voluntarily”, as if that somehow made a difference. She gave it up only because she had no choice, it was going to be taken from her regardless of her cooperation, or not. Read what “dman1971” says, above. Silly, delusional HRC still thinks she can make herself look good if she does certain things (such as “voluntarily” giving up her clearance. To her it somehow makes it better if it was HER choice). Newsflash for Hillary: when you are ugly in your soul, nothing will make you look good.


      • mashall says:

        The body language was outrageously inappropriate considering Lindsay Graham spouts continuously to “care” about America and pursuing justice
        Huma is a Muslim Brotherhood Mole.
        Lindsay is a overt Globalist Traitor.
        Vote Lindsay Graham out.


        • yaosxx says:

          Graham seems to have distinctly turned of late! With regards Huma you’re more likely to get information from your enemy if you appear friendly and conciliatory. Some are saying Graham appears a different man now McCain (No Name) is gone…

          Liked by 1 person

        • Will Hunt says:

          Being from SC my sense is that Mr. Graham is reading the tea leaves regarding his constituency and has done what all chameleons do – change color to blend in with his environment.

          Liked by 2 people

  3. Deplorable_Infidel says:

    “Hillary Clinton’s security clearance has been withdrawn at her request.”

    I just got home, so have not read previous comments. To me, this just seems that she wasn’t getting any valuable information with it anyway, so she proactively requested this “just in case” she gets charged criminally. Her lawyers will argue that she has been punished enough by not have the clearance that most other retired, useless bureaucrats have been able to keep.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. Why? Then again, if she needs any special info in something or someone, she can use Billy’s clearance. I’m sure he still has his.

    Liked by 3 people

  5. weareallbreitbart says:

    I doubt anything HRC had done with her email was innocent.laws

    If you or I did one tenth of what she did on purpose or not, in a role in state departmen or military with similar regulations and laws we would be in jail.

    Liked by 4 people

  6. jus wundrin says:

    Even after obama said that hillary was just being ‘careless’ for having above top secret material on her home brewed server, her clearance should have been revoked ASAP.

    So why wasnt it??????

    Liked by 3 people

  7. A member of our research team found this interesting piece of information. I hope Sundance reads messages, this could be significant…

    Look at the EO that was quoted as being used to give open access to the redacted names.
    “Sec. 4.4. Access by Historical Researchers and Certain Former Government Personnel.

    (a) The requirement in section 4.1(a)(3) of this order that access to classified information may be granted only to individuals who have a need-to-know the information may be waived for persons who:

    (1) are engaged in historical research projects;
    (2) previously have occupied senior policy-making positions to which they were appointed or designated by the President or the Vice President; or
    (3) served as President or Vice President.”

    Is William Clinton one of the redacted names?

    EO Link:

    Liked by 2 people

  8. Rod McC. says:

    Asking them to remove it administratively isn’t having it revoked. The former is something that happens all the time – it should have happened the minute she was no longer SoS. It also means it can be reinstated, assuming nothing arises to bar that.


  9. Sayit2016 says:

    I do not believe for one minute it was “voluntarily”revoked.

    Why are names redacted?

    HUMA? Was her security clearance pulled?

    Liked by 2 people

  10. Sayit2016 says:

    It should have been revoked before she went to New Zealand.

    Liked by 1 person

  11. mashall says:

    “The price of liberty is eternal vigilance.”

    Liked by 1 person

  12. I’ve never seen a more appropriate word for her and her kind. Just take out the word ‘small’, and we have a winner:
    CABAL: a small group of people united in some close design, usually to promote their private views of or interests in an ideology, state, or other community, often by and usually unbeknownst to those outside their group. The use of this term usually carries negative connotations of political purpose, conspiracy and secrecy.

    Liked by 1 person

  13. Do you know what the problem is in this whole ordeal? I mean the complete lawlessness within the whole guvment, through and through. The AG. His use of the word ‘candid’. Resulting from his ‘investigation’, he worded the crimes in such a way that made the criminals’ crimes not illegal. He should have used the proper word, perjury. He knows it, as well as every single one of them. Even the ‘good’ guys. Why don’t these ‘good guys’ come out and say it? I’ve asked them, but of course I don’t/won’t get an answer, as I’m just a nobody in the big social network scheme of things, and they know it.


  14. Jeepers Treepers says:

    Why are they hiding the other names from us?


  15. thinkthinkthink says:



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s