This isnt just bloggers and pundits saying so. Its a reality exposed by Ken Cuccinelli, the former Attorney General of Virginia.
Heres how Cuccinelli describes it.
When Clinton would draft an email based on classified information, she was drafting that email on an authorized Blackberry, iPad or computer. But when she hit send, that email was knowingly routed to her unsecured server an unauthorized location for both storage and transfer.
Additionally, when Clinton moved the server to Platte River Networks (a private company) in June 2013, and then again when she transferred the contents of the server to her private lawyers in 2014, the classified materials were in each instance again removed to another unsecured location.
Next we have the lack of proper authority to move or hold classified information somewhere, i.e., the unauthorized location.
While its possible for a private residence to be an authorized location, and its also possible for non-government servers and networks to be authorized to house and transfer classified materials, there are specific and stringent requirements to achieve such status. Simply being secretary of state didnt allow Clinton to authorize herself to deviate from the requirements of retaining and transmitting classified documents, materials and information.
There is no known evidence that her arrangement to use the private email server in her home was undertaken with proper authority.
Finally, theres the intent to retain the classified documents or materials at an unauthorized location.
The very purpose of Clintons server was to intentionally retain documents and materials all emails and attachments on the server in her house, including classified materials.
The intent required is only to undertake the action, i.e., to retain the classified documents and materials in the unauthorized fashion addressed in this statute. Thats it.
Heres the statute.
According to the law, there are five elements that must be met for a violation of the statute, and they can all be found in section (a) of the statute: (1) Whoever, being an officer, employee, contractor, or consultant of the United States, and, (2) by virtue of his office, employment, position, or contract, becomes possessed of documents or materials containing classified information of the United States, (3) knowingly removes such documents or materials (4) without authority and (5) with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location [shall be guilty of this offense].
The FBI is running an ongoing and very active investigation on the scandal to determine whether or not it will recommend prosecution to the Justice Department. Barack Obama is heavily sabotaging the investigation, however, by stating publicly that no crime was committed.
Never mind that its an ongoing investigation and the FBI has yet to determine that. Never mind that the rest of us know for a fact she broke the law. Obama is making it clear he wants the case closed. And his words signal that to the DOJ, the entity that would need to file charges if the FBI recommend it do so.
Heres what Obama said.
I dont think it posed a national security problem, Mr. Obama said Sunday on CBSs 60 Minutes. He said it was a mistake for Mrs. Clinton to use a private email account when she was secretary of state, but his conclusion was unmistakable: This is not a situation in which Americas national security was endangered.
As you might imagine, the comment wasnt taken lightly by those in the FBI community.
Those statements angered F.B.I. agents who have been working for months to determine whether Ms. Clintons email setup had in fact put any of the nations secrets at risk, according to current and former law enforcement officials.
The White House quickly backed off the presidents remarks and said Mr. Obama was not trying to influence the investigation. But his comments spread quickly, raising the ire of officials who saw an instance of the president trying to influence the outcome of a continuing investigation and not for the first time.
A spokesman for the F.B.I. declined to comment. But Ron Hosko, a former senior F.B.I. official who retired in 2014 and is now the president of the Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund, said it was inappropriate for the president to suggest what side of the investigation he is on when the F.B.I. is still investigating.
Injecting politics into what is supposed to be a fact-finding inquiry leaves a foul taste in the F.B.I.s mouth and makes them fear that no matter what they find, the Justice Department will take the presidents signal and not bring a case, said Mr. Hosko, who maintains close contact with current agents.
Unbelievable. This man truly believes hes not only above the law… in his mind he is the law.