Clinton claims that she “did not send nor receive anything that was classified at the time.” But the inspector general found classified intelligence from five separate intelligence agencies — the Central Intelligence Agency, the National Security Agency, the Defense Intelligence Agency, the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence — in Clinton’s e-mails. Taking intelligence from classified documents and putting it in unclassified e-mails does not make the information unclassified. Indeed, that is arguably an additional offense. There is a separate classified e-mail system — called the SIPRNet — for classified communications. Clinton was required by law to use that system for any e-mails containing classified information.
If Sandy Berger had to pay a fine, serve two years of probation, do 100 hours of community service and give up his security clearance and law license, all for removing and retaining just five classified documents, what should Clinton’s punishment be for reportedly removing and retaining hundreds or even thousands of classified documents?
This is not a mere technicality. The recent revelation that Chinese hackers broke into the Office of Personnel Management and stole information on 22 million Americans has highlighted the need for increased vigilance in protect the nation’s secrets. Clinton’s decision to brazenly remove classified information and store it on a private server put sensitive intelligence within easy reach of America’s adversaries. If China can hack the Office of Personnel Management, it could easily hack into the private computer network she ran from her Chappaqua home.