Clinton benefitted from The New York Times first reporting that the referral was “criminal” rather than (as it later clarified) “a security referral made for counterintelligence purposes.” In classic Clintonian fashion, she pounced on the terminology, decrying erroneous reporting.

But that clarification is a distinction without a difference. Having been briefed on or involved in numerous counterintelligence investigations, we know there’s no such thing as a strictly “criminal” or “counterintelligence” referral.

When matters relating to significant improper handling of classified information are referred to the Department of Justice, they’re taken seriously and investigated by the FBI, where the matter could die or evolve into a prosecution.

It all depends on the facts uncovered during the investigation.