Letters to the Editor

It’s not ‘the street’ criticizing Clinton

I read with interest Richard Creel’s Letter to the Editor, which criticized the times “guilt and punishment are insisted on raucously by ‘the street’” when referring to Hillary Clinton’s use of her private server while handling government emails.

I would refer Mr. Creel to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 793(f) and also to the 2009 Federal Records Act Sec. 1236.22, which, in my opinion, were both violated by Ms. Clinton.

While on the subject, and in an attempt to enlighten Mr. Creel, I would like to remind him of several distasteful events surrounding the “investigation”: First, a private meeting that took place between Bill Clinton and Attorney General Loretta Lynch is against any judicial conduct I’ve ever heard of. Second, I have never heard of an FBI interview where the subject was not put under oath during questioning. Asking us to believe such an interview was not recorded or that notes weren’t taken is ludicrous.

I would also like to remind Mr. Creel that Hillary has often stated publicly that none of the emails sent or received while using her private server were marked “classified.” I have held, at times, security clearances up to and including top secret. I have never had a security clearance designated as classified, which is a term referring to sensitive information labeled confidential, secret, top secret or higher.

I hope Mr. Creel would rephrase his “talk on the street” comment as several groups and committees have determined Ms. Clinton violated, at the very least, the spirit of the law, if not the law itself.

Chuck Burkhard

Ocean Springs