The worst of the lot was Sandy Berger, who strolled into the archives, stuffed highly classified documents down his pants, and smuggled them out.  He was let off with a misdemeanor, community service, and a fine, with no jail time.  See this report from CNN.  Other grossly negligent breaches by other officials have escaped any sanction at all.

Now we have Hillary Clinton, who sent emails through her own private server while Secretary of State.  The Inspector General for the Intelligence Community confirms what many have suspected all along.  In this cover memo, which is unclassified once the attachments are removed, the IG says, "These emails ... include information classified up to 'TOP SECRET//SI/TK/NOFORN.'"  "Top secret" requires no translation.  SI is "Special Intelligence," relating to communications intercepts.  TK is "Talent Keyhole," relating to satellite and imagery intelligence.  NOFORN means not releaseable to foreign nationals.  See this DoD manual and  this Wikipedia page.

Suffice it to say that this is heavy stuff, and use of a private server with dubious security to send and receive it is grossly reckless dereliction of duty at the very least.  Is it criminal?

Here is the statute Sandy Berger pleaded guilty to violating, 18 U.S.C. § 1924(a):

(a) Whoever, being an officer, employee, contractor, or consultant of the United States, and, by virtue of his office, employment, position, or contract, becomes possessed of documents or materials containing classified information of the United States, knowingly removes such documents or materials without authority and with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than one year, or both.

For all the wailing and gnashing of teeth about overcriminalization, I think this is a case of undercriminalization.  This is only a misdemeanor.  It should be a felony.  But did Secretary Clinton violate it?

Officer of the United States? Check.

By virtue of his office?  Check.  [No, the statute's use of the male pronoun as the unmarked gender doesn't matter.]

Becomes possessed of documents or materials?  An email is probably a document but it is certainly material.  Do you "become possessed" of a document if you write it yourself?  Sure.  I wrote classified documents.  I never took them home to use as future writing samples and did not doubt that I would be court-martialed if I did.  Check.

Knowingly removes?  When you send an email, you make a copy and send it to the server.  That's removal.  Check.

With the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location?  She certainly knew they were being retained on the server.  Is that sufficient?  I think it is.  Very few statutes require purpose, as distinguished from knowledge, for the mental state requirement.  (See this post on the Facebook threats case, Elonis v. United States.)  Check.

Seems to me to be a clear-cut violation.  Like Mr. Berger, I don't think there is any real chance of Mrs. Clinton going to jail, but I do think misdemeanor charges, at least, are in order.

-----------------
Update:  Senator Feinstein says Mrs. Clinton did not write any of the emails identified so far as classified.  Damian Paletta has this story in the WSJ.  The case may not be quite as clear as to her personally based on these emails.  Nonetheless, the investigation should continue.  Forwarding one would also be a violation.
-----------------

BTW, for those who are fans of Michael Ramirez's cartoons and have missed him since he left the L.A. Times, his work can be found at Investors Business Daily.  As a cartoonist who is Politically Incorrect and actually knows how to draw, Ramirez is rare squared and a welcome change from sludge that passes for political cartoonery today.