It’s time for the Democratic Party to come to terms with Hillary Clinton’s wrongdoings, fabrications, and blatant neglect.

The Office of Inspector General’s report released Wednesday is the most crucial piece of evidence that’s been seen to date suggesting Clinton has broken federal law through unauthorized use of a private email server.

Now, while the IG continues to state she has broken “policies,” they fail to talk about the fact that the “policies” she has broken were designed around the Federal Records Act of 1950. By violating the policy, Clinton has not only violated the law, but also consistently denied doing so publicly numerous times.

Superdelegates within the Democratic Party need to take the findings of this report, and her visibly inconsistent defense, into serious consideration.

“OIG found no evidence that the Secretary requested or obtained guidance or approval to conduct official business via a personal email account on her private server,” the report stated.

Arguments to the contrary will point out that former Secretary of State Colin Powell was found to have used a private email as well. However, there is no wrongdoing by using a private email, as long as an official doesn’t use it to discuss matters related to the government or solely depends on it.

Clinton, as everyone knows, used a private server set up in her own home in Chappaqua, New York. The key finding is that she did not seek any sort of authorization from the State Department, and officials have even said they “did not — and would not — approve her exclusive reliance on a personal email account to conduct Department business, because of the restrictions in the FAM and the security risks in doing so.”

This is just the beginning of what could be a very tumultuous next few months for Clinton. The FBI is in the midst of concluding their report in which they are investigating her email server.

For months, Clinton defended her use of a private server and personal email address, saying she was authorized and compliant with State Department policy, and in one report, her entire argument has been proven to be completely and utterly false. The following video in which she defends herself numerous times exemplifies the fact that she lied to the public.

The Department of Justice still could indict her. Regardless of whether that is carried out, surely the recommendation alone should be enough to warrant the superdelegates to reconsider. Never in the history of U.S. politics has a presidential candidate been under an FBI investigation leading up to the convention.

A vast majority of the superdelegates have already pledged their support for the Democratic frontrunner. After the recent report and the pending FBI investigation, they must realize the significance and the potential consequences of backing Clinton at the Democratic National Convention.

With all of these facts being public knowledge they are proving that despite Clinton violating federal law, she is still a viable candidate to be commander in chief. It also undermines the outpouring support Bernie Sanders has received. By putting forth Clinton at the convention, they potentially hand Donald Trump the White House who, according to polls, would lose to Sanders but defeat Clinton.

Superdelegates were designed to give high-ranking party officials more power to protect the party’s interests, and by sticking with Clinton, they risk a Trump presidency. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, DNC Chairperson, has even said that superdelegates have been created to prevent grassroots movements from coming into fruition.

If this election has proven anything, it’s that, based on the strong support behind Trump and Sanders, most of the American people are calling for some form of anti-establishment politics.