Espionage Law: Hillary's Breach And Its Implications

Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server while at the Department of State has sparked a political and legal debate. While serving as Secretary of State, Clinton sent and received classified information via email on a private, non-governmental server. This has raised questions about whether she broke espionage laws, specifically regarding the handling of classified information. The Federal Bureau of Investigation's Counterintelligence Division is actively investigating Clinton's use of the private server, and while she has not been charged, the investigation is ongoing.

Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server

The Federal Bureau of Investigation's (FBI) Counterintelligence Division launched an active investigation into Clinton's use of the private server, examining whether she unlawfully handled and stored classified government information. This probe centred on Clinton sending and receiving emails containing classified information via a private, non-governmental server.

The controversy surrounding Clinton's email practices centred on two key issues: the security of sensitive information and compliance with record-keeping laws. The FBI investigation uncovered thousands of emails containing information that should have been treated as government secrets, including eight messages with "Top Secret" information sent or received through unsecure channels. While no direct evidence of hacking was found, the FBI believed it possible that "hostile actors" may have accessed the server.

Clinton's defence rested on her assertion that she was unaware of the classification of the emails at the time they were sent or received. However, critics, including Republican lawmakers, questioned her intent and whether she knowingly put national security at risk. Clinton's training in handling classified information as Secretary of State further fuelled the debate, with some arguing that she intentionally disregarded protocols.

Despite the concerns, FBI Director James Comey announced on July 5, 2016, that he would not recommend filing criminal charges against Clinton. Comey cited insufficient evidence of malicious intent, stating that all prosecuted cases involved clear indications of intentional misconduct or disloyalty to the United States. Comey's decision sparked criticism from both sides of the political aisle, with some arguing that Clinton's actions warranted criminal charges.

FBI investigation into Clinton's handling of classified information

The FBI's investigation into Hillary Clinton's handling of classified information began as a referral from the Intelligence Community Inspector General. It focused on whether classified information was transmitted on Clinton's personal email server while she was Secretary of State.

The FBI's investigation found that Clinton had sent and received thousands of emails containing classified information on her personal email server. While some of these emails contained markings indicating the presence of classified information, many did not. However, participants who know or should know that the subject matter is classified are still obligated to protect it.

The FBI also discovered that Clinton had used several different servers and administrators during her four years as Secretary of State. Additionally, thousands of work-related emails were not turned over to the State Department in 2014 and were later recovered by the FBI from various sources, including the archived emails of government officials with whom Clinton corresponded.

While the FBI found evidence of potential violations of statutes regarding the handling of classified information, they did not recommend criminal charges. FBI Director James Comey stated that there was no evidence of criminal intent, and that prosecuting individuals for mishandling classified information typically requires clear evidence of intent. Comey also noted that the security culture of the State Department was generally lacking in the care for classified information found elsewhere in the government.

The FBI's investigation concluded that Clinton and her team had been extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information. However, they did not find direct evidence that Clinton's personal email domain had been successfully hacked, although they assessed that it was possible that hostile actors had gained access.

Clinton's intent to mishandle classified information

Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server for official communications while serving as Secretary of State sparked controversy and led to an FBI investigation into her handling of classified information. While the investigation uncovered evidence of potential violations, Clinton was not charged with any crimes.

Clinton's private server was discovered in March 2015 by the Benghazi panel, which was investigating Clinton's knowledge of the Libyan embassy attack. This revelation prompted an FBI investigation into whether Clinton's conduct violated laws pertaining to the handling of classified information.

The investigation found that Clinton sent and received classified information via email on her private, non-governmental server while serving as Secretary of State. This included information deemed Top Secret and Secret, which are the highest levels of classification. The use of a private server was in direct conflict with U.S. government policy, and Clinton's actions were deemed extremely careless and negligent by FBI Director James Comey.

However, despite the serious concerns raised by the investigation, Clinton was not charged with any crimes. Comey stated that there was no evidence of criminal intent, and prosecuting Clinton would have been "unfair and virtually unprecedented." The decision not to prosecute was influenced by the high bar set for prosecuting violations of laws pertaining to classified information and the difficulty of proving criminal intent in such cases.

While Clinton avoided criminal charges, her actions had significant repercussions. The controversy surrounding her email server became a major point of contention during the 2016 presidential election, in which she was the Democratic nominee. The investigation and its subsequent reopening shortly before the election drew extensive media coverage and likely contributed to her loss, as acknowledged by Clinton herself. Additionally, the State Department's internal investigation, which concluded in September 2019, cited 588 security violations, with 38 individuals found culpable for mishandling classified information.

The Espionage Act of 1917

The Wilson administration, along with Postmaster General Albert S. Burleson and Attorney General Thomas Watt Gregory, aggressively enforced the Espionage Act of 1917 to limit dissent. By 1918, 74 newspapers had been denied mailing privileges, seriously threatening First Amendment freedoms. The Supreme Court of the United States initially upheld these convictions, but later reversed course, increasingly protecting free speech over time.

FBI's decision not to recommend criminal charges against Clinton

On July 5, 2016, FBI Director James Comey announced that the FBI would not recommend criminal charges against former State Department Secretary Hillary Clinton for her mishandling of classified information through private email servers. Comey stated that Clinton and her aides had been "extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information." However, he asserted that their actions did not warrant criminal charges.

In his statement, Comey acknowledged that the FBI found "evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information." Specifically, the investigation uncovered thousands of emails containing information that should have been treated as government secrets, including eight messages with Top Secret information. These emails had been sent through unsecure, unclassified channels on Clinton's private email network. Despite this, Comey emphasised that there was no clear evidence of criminal intent, which is a crucial factor in prosecuting violations of the laws pertaining to the handling of classified information.

Comey's decision not to recommend charges was met with criticism from both Republican and Democratic sides. Some Republican lawmakers, including the GOP presumptive presidential nominee Donald Trump and House Speaker Paul Ryan, questioned why Clinton was not charged with a provision of the Espionage Act, which criminalises the disclosure of classified information or its removal from a secure place through "gross negligence." In response, Comey stated that prosecutors have generally been reluctant to pursue such cases, and that he could not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Clinton intended to receive classified information on her server.

The FBI's decision not to recommend charges against Clinton was a highly unusual move, as such determinations are typically made privately to protect the reputation of the individual being investigated. However, Comey justified his public statement by citing the intense public interest in the case.

Frequently asked questions