The Daily Caller News Foundation has done it again. While this isn’t one of those stories which is likely to blow up into (yet another) scandal for Hillary Clinton’s campaign, it does provide a peek inside of our military and how they view their potential next Commander in Chief. There’s a slide from a military security presentation making the rounds, allegedly coming from a solider who took this particular course. It shows examples of threats to national security through the release of classified information. The list of “suspects” is rather interesting to say the least.
Admins of the Facebook page “U.S. Army W.T.F! moments” told The Daily Caller News Foundation this is the second time they’ve received a picture of this particular slide in the last six months. They posted the slide to their page Sunday.
Admins said the picture came from a servicemember stationed at Fort Leonard Wood in Missouri.
The brief, marked unclassified, lists servicemembers Nidal Hassan, Chelsea Manning, Edward Snowden and Aaron Alexis as examples of threats.
On the second row, the brief pictures Clinton and Petraeus. The text of “careless or disgruntled employees” echoes FBI Director James Comey’s description, “extremely careless,” of Clinton’s handling of top secret and classified information when she served as Secretary of State.
My, my… that’s quite the rogues gallery.
In some of these cases you might think that Clinton would be proud to be displayed alongside them. Chelsea Manning in particular is a hero to both the transgender community and liberals who admire service members who leak classified data without permission or thought to who might be harmed. Snowden falls into the latter category as well, though he’s wanted for a chat with the FBI just as Manning was. And being next to someone with the military record of General Petraeus should offer a morale boost, even if he did get himself into trouble over disclosures which were nowhere near as serious as Clinton’s private server turned out to be.
But that heading at the top… “Who is the threat?” That’s got to sting a bit. My only beef with the course instructors is that none of these examples really fall under the category of “careless” now, do they? Petraeus was using an insecure system, true. (Gmail in that case.) But he knowingly and intentionally told things to his lover which he must have known might see the light of day. Clinton should be obvious at this point. She didn’t accidentally set up a private server at considerable personal expense and delete thousands of government documents from it, including some marked as classified. Those were deliberate acts. Everyone in the top row is pretty much a flat out criminal.
Still, as noted above, if this is how the military security community is looking at Clinton now, particularly to the point where they use her as a negative role model in briefings, what will they do if she’s in the Oval Office? Would you give full, unvarnished briefings to someone you’ve already been warned of as being a threat to your nation’s security?