Does Hillary Clinton Pass the Leadership Test?

While Hillary Clinton campaigns to become the next commander in chief, she continually touts her tenure as secretary of state as an indication of strong leadership experience – though a closer examination of her performance reveals that she fails the leadership test.

During her time as secretary of state, Hillary held immense responsibility presiding over hundreds of facilities, thousands of employees, and billions of tax-payer dollars. Unfortunately for Americans, she proved less than suitable to meet the demands of the job.

The Republican National Committee has compiled extensive research on Hillary’s stint in the state department, and we believe it is strong evidence that she is unfit for the Oval Office.

Here’s a look at some of the many ways she showed poor management:

Embassy Security

Federal law states it is the Secretary’s job to ensure U.S. diplomats abroad are safe and secure, yet during her tenure embassy security problems were widespread. Few know that beyond the compound in Benghazi, Libya, diplomatic posts at high threat regularly failed to meet security standards. There were chronic problems vetting local guards protecting U.S. compounds. There were also bureaucracy problems that undermined security and funding requests and poor planning for emergencies.

But when confronted with her record, Clinton denies diplomatic security was her job. It is the sad excuse she used to answer inquiries surrounding the attacks in Benghazi, Libya.

Questionable Contracting

In her confirmation hearings Clinton pledged that contract oversight would be a top priority. But a watchdog report found that Clinton’s State Department failed to account for $6 billion in contract funding, compelling the Department’s Inspector General to send the second “management alert” in the Department’s history.

As a presidential candidate, Clinton railed against the use of no-bid contracts, saying “If we are truly committed to rooting out wasteful spending we must stop these no and limited bid contracts….” But over the four years that Clinton served as Secretary, the State Department awarded over $2 billion in no-bid contracts, more than in the previous four years.

Under Clinton, billions in contract funds went to companies under federal investigation or accused of wrongdoing.

Secure Communications Failures

Despite the Wikileaks debacle, under Secretary Clinton’s watch, “thousands of cables and messages, including highly sensitive and classified ones, [became] vulnerable to espionage or leaks….”

The State Department’s communication system reportedly operated without improved technical security measures in place, even though Department leadership received repeated warnings about vulnerabilities. And don’t forget the fact that Clinton herself used an unsecure secret email server.

The recent revelation that the Chinese successfully stole private information of millions of federal personnel reminds us how inexcusable it is to ignore cyber security warnings.

Interference With Investigations

During Clinton’s tenure, there was no permanent Inspector General, no watchdog to look for waste, fraud, or failures in management. Clinton reportedly had full control within the Obama Administration regarding Department appointments, yet she failed to demand an Inspector General.

Maybe we shouldn’t be surprised: One report found that Clinton’s senior aides tampered with numerous investigations by the Temporary Inspector General. In one instance, her Chief of Staff, Cheryl Mills, blocked an investigation into allegations that a politically connected ambassador was soliciting underage prostitutes.

Clinton’s State Department blocked or failed to comply with investigators looking into warzone mismanagement in Iraq and Afghanistan, and in several instances the Department interfered with congressional investigations into the 2012 terrorist attack in Benghazi. The Wall Street Journalrecently reported that political aides, including Mills, applied political pressure to withhold documents requested under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).

The Buck Stops Where?

Whenever a failure in management makes headlines, Clinton claims ignorance and blames someone else. She refuses to take responsibility if doing so would be politically damaging.

But political spin and deflecting blame are the actions of a politician. Americans expect accountability from our leaders.
Nothing in Hillary Clinton’s record suggests she will hold herself accountable—or even allow others to hold her accountable—if she’s elected president. Don’t Americans deserve better?

If you agree that Hillary is untrustworthy and not fit to be our next President, join us in pledging to Stop her in 2016: Pledge Here.


Read the RNC’s original post here