“Pure Political Hackery”: Security Expert Blasts Republicans’ Latest Attack on Clinton

A House bill aims to make it easier to prosecute the mishandling of classified information.

Brian Snyder/Zuma

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


A group of House Republicans has devised a new attack on Hillary Clinton for her use of a private email server, introducing a bill that would change federal laws that determine government prosecution of those accused of mishandling classified information.

The Classified Information Protection Act of 2016, introduced Wednesday by Rep. John Ratcliffe (R-Texas), would amend two federal statutes by adding a single line: “In a prosecution…the Government need not prove that the defendant intended to cause harm to the United States.”

Ratcliffe said in a press release that the bill is a direct response to the Justice Department’s decision not to prosecute Clinton after she passed classified information through a private home email server during her time as secretary of state.

“Despite overwhelming evidence uncovered by the FBI that Clinton was ‘extremely careless’ in her handling of highly classified information, Director James Comey said he recommended not pursuing criminal charges because there was no clear evidence proving her intent,” Ratcliffe said in the release. “If this is the precedent, if this is the standard—what’s to prevent this same level of extreme carelessness in the future? What’s to stop the reckless disregard for the sensitivity of classified information from again jeopardizing the lives of Americans in harm’s way?”

Bradley Moss, a Washington, DC-based national security lawyer who deals with cases related to classified information, told Mother Jones that Ratcliffe’s legislation was “pure political hackery.”

“[The legislation] would change nothing in terms of how the FBI evaluated the Hillary case,” he said. “Comey’s point wasn’t that they had to prove intent to charge her. His point was that as a matter of prosecutorial discretion, the FBI generally doesn’t recommend charges when there was no intent to mishandle classified information.”

Moss added that the FBI director also said that under normal circumstances, “the person would instead be punished administratively. That’s not an option here for Hillary.”

The Clinton campaign did not respond to a request for comment.

Among the Republican co-sponsors of the measure are those who have been most vocal about Clinton’s handling of her emails, including House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.), House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), and Rep. Will Hurd (R-Texas). Hurd served in the CIA as an undercover officer from 2000 to 2009, a role he’s discussed publicly while coming close to disclosing classified information himself. Chaffetz has actively kept the email story going over the last few months and asked the FBI and the DOJ to investigate whether Clinton lied to Congress when she testified about the server during the Benghazi hearings last October. His request came after Comey told Chaffetz the FBI didn’t investigate whether Clinton lied to Congress about the server during its investigation into mishandled classified information.

On July 5, Comey announced the findings of the FBI’s yearlong criminal investigation into Clinton’s use of multiple email servers over her four years as the nation’s top diplomat. The agency determined that of the 30,000 emails it reviewed, 110 (within 52 email chains) contained classified information at the time they were sent or received, and eight contained information deemed top secret by the originating agencies. A subsequent release of FBI records noted that a laptop and thumb drive containing the entire set of emails was lost by Clinton’s staff. “Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information,” Comey said.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate