David Manuta

Community contributor

Now that the political conventions have ended, the Presidential Election will be between Donald Trump of the GOP and Hilary Clinton of the Democrats.

Former Secretary of State Clinton has been investigated by the FBI on her e-mails and on what appears to be the fuzzy line between the State Department and the Clinton Foundation. Mrs. Clinton's enablers in the Democrat Party and in the mainstream news media do not see these issues as potentially show-stopping, since both are more interested in misinterpreting what is coming out of Mr. Trump's mouth.

Due to the recent scrutiny that Secretary Clinton had undergone with the FBI, it is now clear that she can no longer pass a background check. If she cannot pass a background check, then she cannot obtain a Security Clearance (e.g., Secret). In this area, this means that if Secretary Clinton sought employment at the Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant in Piketon, she could not be hired.

By not using a secured government computer server for its intended purpose, Clinton knowingly allowed Secret-level correspondence to be sent and received. This type of violation in the military would subject the accused to Court Martial and (if convicted) to a long stretch in the Brig. In the federal nuclear weapons complex, job termination followed by indictment and trial could result (if convicted) in a long sentence in federal prison.

Had I been in a position to prosecute Clinton, I would have asked her one question, "Were you absent on the day that the security indoctrination was given at the State Department?" If the answer was yes, then I'd follow up with "Was there a reason why you were absent?" Should the answer be no, then I'd follow up with "Were you not aware of the importance of protecting classified information?"

Two takeaways are that classification/security rules apply to everyone and the second is that by failing to follow the rules, Clinton can longer be trusted with classified information (including Secret). She should no longer receive classified intelligence briefings.

The result is that since Clinton can no longer access classified materials, she by this reckoning is disqualified from running for President. Since the Democratic Party and the mainstream news media appear not to be capable of understanding what I have written, it becomes a civic duty to inform others of these egregious and serial violations of the law.

Secretary Clinton's actions are governed by 18 US Code 793 (Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information). Violations of this law can result in the accused being fined and/or (if convicted) jailed for up to ten years.

If the mishandling of classified documents and e-mails were not enough, then the Pay to Play aspects of the Clinton Foundation (as a lever to induce the desired action by the State Department) is also disqualifying for running for president. In brief, there are dozens of examples cited by the Associated Press indicating that contact with certain key individuals within the Clinton Foundation often enabled a meeting with the Secretary of State. The requester would often then reciprocate the Clinton Foundation with a donation.

Article I, Section 6 of the US Constitution (the emoluments clause) indicates that (in paraphrase) "... No one who is appointed to any civil Office under the Authority of the United States, which shall have been created, can receive Emoluments from a second entity..."

By remaining on the Clinton Foundation Board of Directors, Clinton clearly benefited when a donation was received. This is especially true should the Clinton Foundation have arranged for the donor to meet with Secretary Clinton.

While Donald Trump is hardly the exemplar for the ideal presidential candidate, he is not disqualified from serving due to the violations of 18 US Code 793 and the US Constitution (as Hillary Clinton is alleged). In the event that Secretary Clinton remains on the ballot and that she actually wins the election, the American People will lose. Rule of Law, the bedrock of American Democracy for two centuries, will be lost.

David Manuta, of Waverly, owns his own chemical consulting business and is a member of the Gazette’s board of contributors.