Hillary Clinton Email Probe Update: Following State Department's Scathing Audit, FBI Could Push For Hillary's Indictment

Mohit Priyadarshi

Hillary Clinton could be in a precarious position following State Department's internal audit that found the former Secretary of State had violated federal procedures on more than one occasion during her time as the head of the Department.

As reported by The Inquisitr, Obama administration appointed State Department Inspector General Steve Linick submitted a report to the Congress on Wednesday, which was also simultaneously leaked to the press on the same day, suggesting that Hillary Clinton's email gaffes were not "appropriate" and violated several federal protocols. The report points out that not only did Clinton bypass federal procedure by not handing out all the emails to the State Department before leaving office, but that she also never sought approval to use her highly contentious private server to conduct official business in the first place.

The Inspector General's report has evidently caused a flutter in Clinton's camp, and while those defending her have argued that former Secretaries of State have also made similar errors in judgment, her critics see the report as damning evidence that Clinton has been gravely at fault.

Left-leaning media outlets have also been critical of Hillary Clinton's email practices, with The Washington Post slamming the Democratic front-runner for what it said was an "inexcusable, willful disregard for the rules."

Appearing on The O'Reilly Factor, Judge Andrew Napolitano argued that the release of the internal audit is significant for two reasons.

"Today is a big day for a couple of reasons. First, it directly refutes a statement [Hillary Clinton] has made a dozen of times saying 'it was allowed.' We now know it was not allowed.

The second point I was going to make is she didn't even ask. But then she would say 'I didn't know enough to ask.' She signed a two-page statement under oath on her first day in the job, which was given after she had a two-hour tutorial by two FBI agents telling her about the about the proper care and legal obligations for state secrets. And in that oath, she swore that she had the obligation to know how to care for state secrets and to recognize them."

The second point I was going to make is she didn't even ask. But then she would say 'I didn't know enough to ask.' She signed a two-page statement under oath on her first day in the job, which was given after she had a two-hour tutorial by two FBI agents telling her about the about the proper care and legal obligations for state secrets. And in that oath, she swore that she had the obligation to know how to care for state secrets and to recognize them."

"It gives Comey additional cover, and makes it easier for the FBI to recommend to the Justice 
Department to pursue an 
indictment," he said.

It is a viewpoint Republican strategist Ford O'Connell concurs with.

"If you're a neutral arbiter like James Comey, you have to say, 'Hats off. There's actual proof.' It gives him cover if he wants to pursue charges through the Department of Justice."

"There is ample evidence to indict her. And the only way she wouldn't be is if the President or the Attorney General makes a political decision," he concluded.

[Photo by Spencer Platt/Getty Images]

ALL CONTENT © 2008 - 2021 THE INQUISITR.