The Little Pantsuit That Couldn't (Tell the Truth)

By Investor's Business Daily

Emailgate: The refusal of State Department spokesperson Jen Psaki to answer a simple yes or no question — did Hillary Clinton sign separation form OF-109? — is proof of a cover-up of a felony by the former secretary of state.

You'd think that if Clinton didn't sign separation form OF-109 or was not asked to, the State Department and Team Hillary would have just said so.

After all, it would be easier to deflect questions about getting special treatment than acknowledging the committing of a felony by essentially lying under oath with the false claim that you have returned all government materials in your possession, including your emails.

As former DOJ lawyer Shannen Coffin first pointed out, OF-109 is more than a promise that you have not absconded with some office supplies.

It's meant as a reminder that you can't take your work product with you, and that the employee is required to sign under penalty of perjury something akin to the threat of prosecution that looms just above the signature line on your Form 1040 at tax time.

Most of the press has just ignored the story or already consigned it to the "old news" bin. Thankfully, outlets such as Fox News and the Associated Press are pursuing the matter, with AP suing the State Department to get the emails that were returned years after Clinton's departure.

Fox News asked Hillary if she signed Form OF-109 as she entered an awards luncheon at the Irish American Hall of Fame in Manhattan. She flashed a Cheshire-cat smile and said hello and then went inside.

On Friday, Fox News filed a Freedom of Information Act request asking whether Clinton signed Form OF-109. State has 20 business days to respond.

Legal expert and Fox News contributor Judge Andrew Napolitano says the delay in getting an answer reflects the dilemma Hillary faces.

If she signed Form OF-109, she faces possible perjury charges. If she did not sign it, then she could be accused of pilfering government documents, just as Team Clinton alumnus and former national security adviser Sandy Berger once did in 2004.

The dilemma of Team Hillary may explain why State Department spokesperson Jen Psaki could not answer the question by AP's Matt Miller whether Clinton signed the form or explain why it couldn't be produced by just walking down the hall and opening up the appropriate cabinet containing employee files.

Hillary Clinton wasn't just another State Department employee, Psaki offered, and we'll get back to you. Considering this is an administration that leaks secrets like a sieve, maybe we can keep all our secrets in the same hard-to-find place as Clinton's OF-109.

Indeed, Clinton was not just another State Department employee, but our secretary of state entrusted with information related to national security discussions and decisions. Her off-site personal email server may have been physically secure, but like all servers it's vulnerable to hacking, as were the personal devices she used for her government work.

It's worth noting that the very existence of a secret "clintonemails.com" domain and email address came from the infamous Romanian hacker Marcel Lazar Lehel, aka "Guccifer," who breached the email account of Sidney Blumenthal, a former Bill Clinton aide who joined Hillary Clinton's 2008 presidential campaign. Blumenthal had sent emails to Hillary at her personal, if not all that private, address.

Hillary Clinton put her political future above national security, something we think disqualifies her from the presidency. Whether or not she is guilty of a felony is found on that form and on her server. Produce both, Mrs. Clinton, and stop hiding the truth about Benghazi, the Clinton Foundation and who knows what else.

Read more at Investor's Business Daily