Stable Non-Hostile Nations

SUMMARY: Our aim is to have friends or allies. But barring that, America’s interest is in having stable and non-hostile powers on the world stage.  

 

In the immediate aftermath of the invasion of Venezuela, many liberal friends of mine were adamant this for one reason, oil. No, that’s not the case. Oil is areason we have an interest in that country, as well as narcotics and other issues. I’ll cover those later in this article. 

 

First we need to take a big picture at what is in the interest of America. What does the United States need in the world? We need access to resources and markets, we need to keep our adversaries at bay, and as such we need other nations assistance. That is, we need friends and allies.

 

A friend is another nation who’s aligned geo-politically, economically and culturally to us (e.g., the United Kingdom, Israel). Also we have multiple allies in the world, such as Saudi Arabia. While we may have different types of societies or government but our critical political and economic interests align. The greatest example of this was the Allies allying with the Soviet Union during World War II against the Axis powers.  

 

What if we don’t have friends or allies in a certain region? We need, to coin a phrase, Stable Non-Hostile Nations. Their interest may not fully align with ours, but they are not opposing ours. They also are stable enough they don’t interfere with American interests in the region. 

 

A current example would be Indonesia. While not a formal ally of the West, we have similar interest against Chinese aggression and free trade. Or Cameroon, with a stable enough government to keep disruptions from overflowing to nearby countries. Another recent example is Israel and Egypt. Very different nations, but as a result of the Camp David accords, both were not hostile to each other.

 

A example of a Stable Non-hostile Nation is Libya. In the aftermath of the 2003 overthrow of Saddam Hussein, Muammar Qaddafi had an epiphany. It’s better to not be in the cross hairs of the United States. Qaddafi gave up his WMD programs, settled multiple lawsuits over the Pan Am 103 bombing, and stopped supporting terrorist groups in the Middle East and Europe. He also shared intelligence with western nations. 

 

In exchange we agreed to let him live. We would stop our efforts to force regime change as long as he kept his country secure and caused no other trouble. Easy, accomplished multiple goals of the US, and cheap. Of course we can’t leave well enough alone.

 

In one of the greatest disasters of the Obama years, in 2011 the administration attacked Libyan targets, destabilizing the Qaddafi regime. Qaddafi’s convoy was attacked by US forces, and he was killed by rebel forces. 

 

Qaddafi was not an ally of the west, but he had changed from being an advisory to a non-hostile regime. Looking at the totality of the circumstances, that was the best we can hope for. We didn’t need to act against Qaddafi, just keep an eye on him. Trust, but verify.

 

Again, Qaddafi was not a nice person. We’re not interested in “nice,” we’re interested in America’s national concerns.  When we can’t have allied nations, we’ll work with nations that are not working against our interests, and stable so we don’t worry about them affecting other countries in the region. 

 

With that as context, let’s look at South America again. Venezuela is definitely in America’s area of interest, like every other country in the western hemisphere. We do not want nations aligning with our adversaries. In the case of Caracas, the Maduro government was very aligned with four of our greatest competitors: Russia, China, Iran and Cuba. 

 

It’s in our national interest to weaken these nations? Absolutely. The weaker they are, the less likely they will engage or compete with us. How do we do that? Isolation, from allies and resources. 

 

How did the end of the Maduro regime affect these nations. Cuba just lost over 31,000 barrels per day (BPD) of crude oil and its derivatives. In the past Venezuela shipped as much as 51,000 BPD, resources Cuba is addicted to. Even before this cut off, Cubans were struggling with power generation, with planned and unplanned power outages common on the island. 

 

Russia has sold multiple weapons system to the Venezuelan government, including many air defense systems. A steady income for the Putin regime, generating cash for his adventures in places like the Ukraine. The Kremlin just lost a reliable paycheck. 

 

China is expanding and hungry, and Venezuela has resources. Prior to last week, China imported 470,000 BPD from Venezuela, approximately 4.5 percent of its seaborn crude. But oil is not Beijing’s only interest. 

 

Venezuela has over 300,000 metric tons of rare earth minerals (e.g., cassiterite, coltan, cerium and lanthanum). China has a large hold of the world market on these minerals, and each advanced nation wants more of them. Beijing is also, like black market oil shipments, importing rare earth minerals from Venezuela under the table. Both supplies has been blocked for the foreseeable future.  

 

Worst off is Iran. After four years of crippling sanctions and trade cut offs in Trump I, Iran was on its knees. Within days of becoming president, Joe O’Biden relieved Tehran of these sanctions and unfroze billions in Iranian assets. Tehran was selling Venezuela  weapons systems (e.g., drones and short-range missiles systems), generating cash for the mullahs. Since January 2025, Iran has been put under sanctions and has the greatest open rebellion against the mullahs since 1979. 

 

With the disposing of the Maduro regime, what can be expected. To be honest, we cannot expect Caracas to be (at least initially) friendly to us, nor an ally of the United States. However, with a less corrupt government, a functioning oil industry and the supporting industries, Venezuela will be stable. A stable nation where millions do not rush to America’s borders or disrupt near by countries with refugees. A stable government not allowing our greatest adversaries access to critical resources, perhaps allowing western companies to handle their extraction. In other words, a Stable Non-Hostile Nation in  what was arguably the most unstable country in South America.

 

So has Trump’s incursion into Venezuela been in America’s best interest? Unquestionable so. We have just given the Venezuelan government reason to not allow drug shipments through its ports so easily. Four of our greatest advisories have been cut off from cash, oil and other minerals. And with any luck, fewer Venezuelan nationals will be heading north, further exacerbating our issues with illegal immigration. It also reaffirms the Monroe Doctrine, we are the preeminent power in the Western Hemisphere. The US must insure no one questions that. 

 

Let’s look at another land issue from the administration. President Trump has been very open about controlling Greenland, as a territory or by treaty.What does that allow us to do? 

 

              

                      Source: Facebook

 

First, it’s not about the land. Controlling Greenland prevents Russia and China from access to northern water routes and Arctic rare minerals. As one person put it on Facebook, ”Whoever controls Greenland controls the high ground of the next century.” It’s close to the western hemisphere, and multiple allied nations. Securing it would provide the West the closest land platform for exploiting these assets and securing sea routes in the north. Definitely in the interest of the West in general, and the US in particular, if we can secure this as a base.  

 

Cutting off our adversaries from critical resources in the West and not allowing them to use these nearby nations as a base to threaten us. Changing volatile  adversaries to Stable Non-Hostile countries so we can obtain resources we need and focus our power on other threats. Looking at Venezuela and Greenland, may I say, Trump might just have a method to his madness. 

A Houston City Member Is Not Concerned About Crime.

A member of the Houston City Council may not want the police cooperating with federal law enforcement. Unfortunately for this dentist turned politician, it's state law.

 

A nation that cannot control its borders is not a nation.

 

President Ronald Reagan

Recently Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) conducted a six-week operation in the Houston area. Over 3,500 illegal aliens were apprehended. Among them were these fine upstanding members of the community:

 

Leo Michel Acosta Sanchez, a criminal illegal alien from Mexico with an Interpol Red Notice in Mexico for aggravated intentional homicide.

 

Angel Gabriel Ramirez-Robles, a criminal illegal alien from Mexico, previously removed TWICE and convicted of sexual assault of a child.

 

Ramiro Ricardo Maldonado-Trevino, a criminal illegal alien from Mexico and known MS-13 gang member, convicted of alien smuggling, who illegally entered the United States SIX TIMES.

 

Noi Ly, a criminal illegal alien from Cambodia, convicted of aggravated kidnapping, burglary, carrying a prohibited weapon, and theft.

 

Gustavo Chacha Cano, a criminal illegal alien from Mexico, convicted for aggravated sex assault child.

 

Hector Eugenio Ramirez-Martinez, a criminal illegal alien from Honduras, convicted for sexual indecency with a child.

 

Filomin Palacios Godino, a criminal illegal alien from Mexico with an active warrant for illegal reentry, previously removed TWICE and convicted of sexual indecency with a child and driving while intoxicated.

 

Well, they are only here to do the crimes, err jobs that native born Americans won’t do anymore, right? Now this sounds like good news, getting illegals off the streets of America will separate us from many criminals, which will make us safer. But not all agree. 

 

A Houston city council member, Letitia Plummer, has put forth a proposal that would require the Houston Police Department to change its policy on contacting ICE on warrants on illegal aliens. She wants it changed from "shall" contact, i.e., a direct order to do so, to "may contact" that is, you are permitted to contact ICE.  Putting it politely, that is very dangerous and stupid.

 

For example, if a cop pulls someone over for a traffic infraction, run's his identification, and gets an ICE hit, they are required to contact ICE and have them verify the warrant. The police may detain that person for a "reasonable" time. If the feds say he's wanted, he is taken into custody. He may be booked at the county jail, or ICE may send out a unit to pick the suspect up.

 

Now if an officer stops an illegal alien and he has a federal warrant, he is likely wanted for more than just immigration issues. While there is discretion with Class C warrants (the lowest level of crime, normally punished with a fine of less than $500.00), there is limited discretion with higher crime warrants. But with all federal and out of county warrants, the issuing agency must be contacted. 

 

Does this sound like a minor issue? I remind Ms. Plumber that a man named Timothy McVeigh was stopped for a missing registration on his car. He was then arrested for an open traffic warrant. McVeigh was minutes away from release when a notice was received by the jail he was a suspect in the Oklahoma City bombing. 

 

I would also remind Ms. Plumber that by Texas SB 8, sheriffs are now required to enter into an agreement with ICE. If the jail identifies an illegal alien, they must contact federal authorities to determine their status with ICE. Both the actions of the cop on the street and the jails are for one purpose. To enforce that law. 

 

If you are in this country illegally, you must be returned to your home country. You want to immigrate here, fine, apply for admission. Ms. Plumber, immigration to the United States is a privilege we extend to people who choose, not a right. If you can’t comprehend that, I suggest you go back to people’s teeth. 

 

The 4th Estate Again Shows Why It’s Beneath Contempt

I despise journalists for the most part. The false narrative they put out of being “objective” and “unbiased” is laughable on its face. Plus the arrogant presumption of only they can determine the news fit for public discussion, and they must frame the terms. Plus, they are ignorant of basic facts, which brings us to this article.  

Reading this “news” you swear Immigration Agents are not law enforcement officers. And the officers have no business other than immigration status. I’m a patrol cop and suppose I pull you over for an expired registration, only to find you really did renew it last night. Fine, you don’t get a ticket for that. But when I run your license I find an open warrant for narcotics, I can’t let you go. You are a wanted criminal. Not apparently in the way of “thinking” for these two ladies. 

Immigration Agents Arrest Man in L.A. Raid and Drive Off With His Toddler

​By Jill Cowan and Mimi Dwyer

U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents descended on a Home Depot parking lot in Los Angeles this week and detained a Latino man. They secured his hands behind his back, and the man, later identified as Dennis Quiñonez, leaned against his Chevy hatchback.

Immigrant rights activists stood nearby, taking video and shouting at the agents, who were masked and heavily armed…

Ladies, may I enlighten you on law enforcement procedure. You detain someone, you are authorized to secure their hands for officer safety. It’s hands that can harm someone, directly or with a weapon. As far as the agents being “masked and heavily armed,” yes they mask themselves to prevent doxing. Also, law enforcement agents (LEOs) are armed as a rule. Plus, will you please define “heavily” armed? Am I heavily armed by having a pocketknife as well as my pistol? Inquiring minds want to know.  

Mr. Quiñonez was taken away to another vehicle. An armed agent slid into the driver’s seat of his Chevy.

“There’s a baby in the back!” an onlooker shouted. Minutes later, someone cried out, “They’re about to drive!”

Another agent, wearing body armor and carrying a rifle, got into the passenger seat.

Again, ladies, LEOs are armed with rare exceptions (e.g., work inside a jail). Also, body armor is required by all agencies these days. So what is the issue with a federal cop being armed and wearing body armor? Where is the “news” in that? Why do I know you’re trying to make federal agents looks like Imperial Stormtroopers. 

Mr. Quiñonez’s daughter — who relatives said later is a few months shy of her second birthday — looked on, wide-eyed from her car seat. Then the driver reversed the car and drove away.

No kidding ladies, welcome to reality. We can’t leave the kid alone and we can’t just turn a child over to any third party. Plus with a hostile group of people surrounding you, it’s often best to get out of the area for the safety of all involved. Also, while the cops are on scene, it allows the agitators (excuse, activists) rile up people on the scene.

The girl was reunited with her grandmother later in the day. But immigrant rights groups say the episode underscores how federal agents across the country have pushed legal boundaries, sometimes in the presence of children, as they carry out the Trump administration’s agenda to deport millions of undocumented immigrants…

…It is not clear whether Customs and Border Protection has a policy on how to handle minor children at the scene of an arrest or detention. But agents for ICE, a separate Homeland Security agency, are not supposed to drive off with the child of a detainee, according to ICE policy. Local law enforcement agencies in Los Angeles County have similar policies requiring officers to call for a social worker.

If I were to hazard a guess the investigators asked Mr. Quiñonez who they could transfer the girl to and he said the grandmother. If he had not, they would transfer the girl to CPS or similar facility for her safety. Welcome to police work ladies, cops have to deal with a suspect’s child or juvenile every day. Rule of thumb, get them to family or a trusted friend as quickly as possible. It's best for the kid. 

… Tuesday’s events began when Customs and Border Protection agents arrested five undocumented immigrants from Mexico and Guatemala, according to the Department of Homeland Security.

Federal authorities said in the affidavit that Mr. Quiñonez got out of his car while holding a hammer “in a threatening manner” about 100 feet away from them. As agents started to drive away, they said they saw Mr. Quiñonez throw two “rock-like” objects at the vehicle before getting back into his own car. After a team of agents boxed in Mr. Quiñonez’s car, he got out and approached agents, who said they believed he had tried to assault them…

According to an affidavit by federal authorities, Mr. Quiñonez, a 32-year-old U.S. citizen, was charged with illegally possessing a firearm and ammunition as someone who had previously been convicted of domestic violence. He was convicted of a misdemeanor for injuring a spouse or cohabitant in 2014, the affidavit said…

OK, a US citizen threatens federal agents in the process of enforcing immigration law. After he is detained, the federal agents discover a weapon and ammunition on him. They run him and discover he has a conviction for domestic violence, which means he cannot carry a firearm (assuming the gun didn’t belong to the girl). That’s called investigation 101.

He is charged with a higher crime (it’s a felony for a man convicted of domestic violence to carry a gun). Also the weapon’s charge is easier to prove (no need for intent, the fact he has it is enough). 

So no, there is no issue here. An idiot decided to threaten ICE agents enforcing federal law and was found to have a kid in the car with him. He endangered her by being an idiot with those agents. When the child was discovered, they took her into protective custody and transferred her in a reasonable amount of time to a family member. 

Reporters trying to make news, that’s par for the course. Correspondents trying to create a false narrative based on a template is also expected. That is too bad. Remember that lie the Washington Post chose as its slogan, Democracy Dies In Darkness? With falsehood like this, you’re the ones cutting off the lights. 

Do We Really Need Illegal Aliens To Drive Commercial Vehicles.

By now you likely heard of two recent incidents with illegal aliens driving commercial trunks. On August 12^th, an 18-wheeler truck, driven by an illegal alien named Harjinder Singh, was operating in Bay County FL. Mr. Singh attempted an illegal U-turn, jackknifed and collided with a minivan. The crash killed all three people on board. Besides Singh, another illegal alien with a commercial driver’s license (CDL), issued by New Jersey, was taken into custody for an ICE hold. Singh was licensed by both Washington state and California. 

On October 22^nd, an illegal alien named Jashanpreet Singh, operating an 18-wheeler outside of Los Angeles plowed into seven vehicles on Interstate-10. This crash killed three and injured four others. What do these three men have in common? One, they are all illegal aliens. Two, their English comprehension was, to put it nicely, limited. Three, they were issued license to drive commercial vehicles in the US by three liberal states. 

. 

The canard liberals push constantly is illegal aliens are only here to do “the jobs Americans won’t do anymore.” I find that factitious at best. At 18 you can get an initial CDL for instate transport in less than two months and under $4,000. If you have a job already with a company, they often times will pay for your training. Additional endorsements (e.g., hazardous materials) will take additional training and experience. Also, for intrastate commerce the federal government requires the driver be at least 21. 

 

The average CDL driver starts at well over $50,000 and it climbs with experience, a safe driving record, and endorsements. I have a high school friend who went the vo-tech route and got his CDL at 19. Now he manages a trucking company in Houston and makes a very good income with great benefits. The endorsements on his license are half the alphabet, you name it, he can haul it. He can command a high five or low six figure income. Not bad for someone who’s only experience with college is delivering things there. 

 

One day I asked him how much had been put into his training over the years. He had to think for a minute and answered, “Mike at least a quarter million dollars.” I asked how much of that he paid for himself? “Nothing.” So he started off in his late teens making good money without having to take out a mortgage for tuition. Sounds like a great career field for someone who’s not college oriented. 

 

More to the point, we need to remember driving any vehicle is someone perilous. Driving a rig is orders of magnitude worse. Two tons verses eighty. There are reason commercial drivers are limited to eleven hours of driving, followed by mandatory ten hours of down time. 

 

As a rookie officer I saw what happens when rigs are driven poorly. A drunk driver was driving an unsecured load in his rig and took a curve too fast. He flipped and crushed an SUV, killing most of the occupants. I believe he is still in prison for intoxication manslaughter, but he should have never been allowed on the road. Same with these three drivers. 

 

Liberals want illegal aliens to cast the votes Americans won’t cast anymore (the dead have their limits). If it means we import gang members that rape and kill your family, tough. But that’s not the only threat. I’ve found too many illegal aliens driving who are not concerned they are a hazard on the road (e.g., speeding, stopping in the middle of the highway for no reason, no insurance, impaired driving). Now we have greater threats on the highway with illegals driving rigs that weigh over 100,000 pounds. 

 

First, we need to continue our efforts to secure the border and deport the illegals already here. Cut it off before it starts. 

 

Second, we need to start holding companies and their staff criminally liable for hiring illegal aliens. If they knew or should have known, the federal government should be prosecuting these people and putting them into jail. And families should be getting multi-million-dollar civil judgements. Hit them where it hurts the most, the wallet. 

 

Next we need to ensure states are not issuing licenses to illegal aliens (as opposed to immigrants). If you issue a CDL to an illegal alien who kills someone, hold the licensing bureau staff legally liable. If it was I my power, the bureaucrats who issued those CDLs would be looking at charges of criminal negligent homicide. Back to my friend with the CDL, it infuriates him that by law you must be fluent in English to possess a CDL. But (in Texas) you can take the written exam in Spanish. What’s wrong with this picture?

Finally, we need to start making it painful for liberal states to continue doing this. Start cutting off all federal transportation funding to states that issue any driver’s license to an illegal alien (commercial or not). You want your Democratic voter endangering your citizens, fine, you do with without the tax dollars of the rest of the states. You’re not only endangering your citizens, but you’re also endangering the lives of others. And that cannot be tolerated. 

Mrs. Bill Clinton and her private email server.

I've been a writer for the American Free News Network since its founding in 2022. One of my fellow authors has an excellent piece on Mrs. Bill Clinton and her use of a private email server for official business. 

I've known countless people who had multiple phones during their daily lives. Usually, it's a private phone and your office phone. Also, multiple email address. When I was deployed overseas in Kuwait, I had three official unclassified addresses. plus two collateral (Secret and below) addresses, and two above that. Not counting my personal email, and I had no issue with handling all of them. But we are supposed to believe the smartest women ever, the most qualified person to be nominated for the presidency could not handle two email address. 

Also, being an Army officer for decades, I know at that level you need both classified and unclassified email addresses for your work. The woman fourth in line for the presidency does not have a classified email account? I find that very hard to believe. No, I know that's a lie. John F. Di Leo has an excellent article on this matter, and why she needs to be prosecuted for her crimes. 

Hillary Clinton and the Needle in a Haystack

September 29, 2025 by John F. Di Leo

For over a decade, the press has been minimizing its coverage of the Hillary Clinton email server issue, as Congress and the conservative media have been trying to get to the truth of the matter.

The facts, as shared, are simple enough:  As Secretary of State during Barack Obama’s first term in the White House, Hillary Clinton chose to violate the law and route all of her email traffic, both personal and work-related, through a private email server in her home in Chappaqua, New York. This kept the emails out of the security and record retention protocols of the federal government, and potentially added an additionally severe crime if any of those emails were classified.

It is generally assumed that, logically, the only reason for her to use a private server at the time was to hide communications that included her criminal activity, but without such evidence, she couldn’t be prosecuted for that.  What she could, and should, be prosecuted for, however, was for removing the necessary government security around her job-related communications, which simply had to include at least some classified material.

As the Clinton gang has parsed, and dissembled, and – oh, the heck with it – outright lied, they have tried to give the impression that there was no classified material on the email traffic that the Secretary of State had for four years.  When some emails were finally found that were marked, in the subject line, as classified, the Clinton gang spun it to say that shouldn’t count because those were incoming emails, not outgoing, and therefore not her fault (as if anyone on earth shouldn’t be able to assume that the email address of a Secretary of State would obviously be a secure line).

But even so, they all miss the point. On both sides of the debate, in fact, people are missing the point, perhaps because many don’t fully realize what the role of the Secretary of State is.

It’s conceivable – not likely, but conceivable – that a Secretary of Education, or Energy, or maybe even Veterans Affairs, could go four years without having any classified emails.  It’s possible.  But she was a Secretary of State.  And what does a Secretary of State do, in his or her daily life?

Passports

The State Department issues passports to US citizens, and authorizes and monitors international travel of American passport holders.  While this is rarely particularly secret, if there’s a challenge that needs to go to the Secretary, it would be.

During her four year term, she had to encounter occasions when the department needed her approval to grant a passport to someone of unproven citizenship, or a felon or suspected-felon on a no-travel order, or a person in a witness protection program, or agents with security clearances, etc.  Such issues would have needed her sign-off, and most such discussions would have been classified, some at the highest level.

Visas

The State Department manages inbound visas for foreigners.  If they wind up wanting to stay here, the responsibility is transferred to Homeland Security.  But the question of granting visas – work visas, tourist visas, political sanctuary visas, etc. – is a matter for State.   Again, these are normally not classified, and would not require escalation to a Cabinet Secretary.

But what of the ones that do?  If a visa question goes to the Secretary – politically oppressed people in Russia or China or the middle east, for example, whether dissidents or just victims of homicidal rebellions like ISIS – then such discussions would be secret; the people’s lives would be in jeopardy if it were known at home that they were trying to escape to the United States.  Any communications about such questions that reach the Secretary would have to be classified.

The Embassy Archipelago

There are United States Embassies and Consulates all over the world, located in friendly nations, unfriendly nations, and everything in between.  State manages and staffs these locations, appointing ambassadors and other employees of the foreign service.

While most embassies and consulates include a commercial side (such as an office of the Department of Commerce for import/export outreach and support), the sites are still operated by State.  There are often military and security aspects to these locations as well – a few marines, a few security personnel from other agencies, either publicly acknowledged or clandestine.

Normal staffing matters – “we’re transferring a clerk from the embassy in London to the embassy in Paris” – might not have to be classified, but then, they wouldn’t be escalated to the Secretary anyway.

What about the less normal staffing matters?  What about questions regarding interdepartmental cooperation, like when the CIA asks to put someone in an embassy for a while, or when an ambassador is meeting with a political opposition group or minority, and needs guidance on what American policy supports or opposes?  What about when a prisoner release or exchange is being negotiated, and the Ambassador needs to know what he can or can’t trade?

These are the questions that would make it to the Secretary… and these are the ones that would be classified.

Arms Control

The Export Controls regime of the United States is primarily split between two departments – State and Commerce.  While Commerce handles most controls on dual-use items (such as products that have a legitimate civilian purpose, but could also be abused for chemical or biological weapon proliferation), the State Department handles everything covered by the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR), in association with the United States Munitions List (USML).

Weapons, weapon parts, and almost anything customized for military use – plus the plans and blueprints, technical specs, molds and dies for manufacturing such things – are therefore controlled by the State Department.

If a defense contractor – say, Northrup Grummon, Honeywell, Ball, General Dynamics, and hundreds of others – is considering outsourcing one of the parts to one of their foreign plants, or is considering selling the parts to one of our allies, they must apply for an export license from State.

Everything about these export license applications – particularly the technology, is confidential.  When a question arises that needs the Secretary’s decision, that email traffic has to be secure.  Our enemies are always trying to get their hands on our defense technology; emails discussing who makes what and how, and who they can share information with and where, are of course classified, or our entire U.S. export control regime is utterly porous.

Treaty Negotiations

One of the key Constitutional responsibilities of the Executive branch is the negotiation of treaties with foreign governments.  The Secretary of State negotiates with the President’s guidance, and then the President submits it to the Senate for their approval or rejection (and, contrary to the practices of the current administration, that’s the only legal way they can be managed).

Some such treaties could, conceivably, be managed without some degree of confidentiality, but not often.  Normally, such treaties – especially since, nowadays, they concern arms control and nuclear non-proliferation efforts – are negotiated based on our own top secret information about what the enemy really has, and what we are really willing to consider giving up.

Such information, of necessity, is obviously confidential.  We cannot allow the enemy – or a third party – to obtain our plans, our internal discussions, our behind-the-scenes evaluations as such treaty negotiations are going on… or for that matter, for many years afterward!

During Hillary Clinton’s tenure at State, there was saber-rattling and more from North Korea and Red China, the virtual evacuation of Iraq and Afghanistan, and a string of revolutions across North Africa and the Middle East.

Under the normal rules governing federal government communications, it is inconceivable that the vast majority of emails that reached the level of Secretary involvement wouldn’t have been classified.

Human Rights

As long as the United States of America have served as a City on the Hill for the rest of the world to emulate, our nation has been a beacon of freedom, seeking out information about foreign prostitution rings, human trafficking organizations, foreign crime gangs, and every other violation of basic human rights that we see on the international news from across the globe.

The State Department applies pressure to foreign governments to stand up to such organizations, attempting to encourage third world governments to bear down on the often politically-connected criminals within their own borders, sometimes organizations that own  a few magistrates or legislators themselves.

Such pressure is a delicate matter, often based on secret discussions by our clandestine agents, local whistle-blowers, or relatives of relatives in-country.  Such documentation naturally must be secret to protect the individuals reporting the matter.

And when they reach the desk of the Secretary, it is again inconceivable that the vast majority of such communications wouldn’t be classified.

Lunch and Dinner

These are only the most obviously serious of the many matters that the State Department handles.  There are countless more, as the leviathan has grown – and each cabinet department with it – in over two centuries of expansion.

But the secrecy of a Secretary’s email is not limited to the obviously classified.  We must remember that a Secretary of State is fourth in line to the Presidency, and therefore has security concerns that you and I don’t have to worry about.

If Hillary Clinton was flying through Chicago to attend her high school reunion, she might have planned a lunch with an old friend… if she flew through Los Angeles on her way to the Far East, she might have planned a shopping trip on Rodeo Drive… if she flew through London on her way to a summit in Europe, she might plan a secret meeting while in town with the British Foreign Minister, or perhaps with some foreign exile who’s hiding in London due to a fatwa.

While the latter would likely be designed with top security, the former might make security challenging.  A famous restaurant in Chicago or shop in L.A. can be secured on the spot, but not if an enemy has a week to prepare.

So it is that even the lunch plans and dinner plans of a U.S. Secretary of State are – and must be – confidential matters. Outside of publicly announced events, such as press conferences, summits, and speaking engagements,  a Secretary of State’s schedule must be tightly controlled, with as much of it as possible kept unknown to any but the participants.

A Secretary of State is no longer an individual private citizen; he or she is a negotiator with foreign countries, many of whom want us – or our allies – to be evaporated, and would stop at nothing to gain the advantage in their effort.  And again, that Secretary is fourth in line to the Presidency.  Particularly in a post-9/11 world, we must take such issues seriously.

It Strains Credulity

And yet, in light of everything we know about the office of Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton expects us to believe that in four years, she never had an email that was classified… or if one came in that was, she shouldn’t be blamed because it was just inbound, not outbound, as if anyone communicating with a United States Secretary of State shouldn’t be able to safely assume that her communications are secure!

In point of fact… virtually HER ENTIRE JOB was classified. For four years, almost everything she did, almost everything that crossed her desk, had to be recognized as some degree of secrecy, anywhere from a low-level confidentiality to a top secret status.

As we have seen, the State Department may indeed do many things that don’t require confidentiality, but none of them would have often reached the desk of the Secretary.  Of those things that did, about the only ones that weren’t classified might have been her attendance at the occasional foreign funeral. Other than that, practically everything she touched had to be sensitive.

In all this time, the spin has been that nothing she did was classified, so to search for an email that was indeed classified was bound to be a matter of looking for a needle in a haystack.

Ridiculous.  In all likelihood, many thousands of the emails were classified – or should have been, and would have been in any sane and competent administration – and that’s why they scrubbed the server so hard.

It’s virtually impossible for it to be otherwise, unless she slept through her entire tenure in the job.

And whatever she did, to the detriment of the United States and the world, we know that she most certainly did not do that.

Copyright 2015-25 John F. Di Leo

This column was originally published in Illinois Review, here.

John F. Di Leo is a Chicagoland-based international transportation and trade compliance trainer and consultant.  President of the Ethnic American Council in the 1980s and Chairman of the Milwaukee County Republican Party in the 1990s, his book on vote fraud (The Tales of Little Pavel), his political satires on the Biden-Harris administration (Evening Soup with Basement Joe, Volumes I, II, and III), and his first nonfiction book, “Current Events and the Issues of Our Age,” are all available in either eBook or paperback, only on Amazon.