Joe Biden whispered in President Obama’s ear, unfortunately within the range of an open microphone and without the sanitization. That was about the ACA. This is about multiple authorities having found classified information in Mrs. Clinton’s e-mails including information classified Top Secret/SCI. Among the possibilities, each is worse than the next: Mrs. Clinton doesn’t care, she doesn’t know, or she doesn’t accept the rules for handling our most sensitive intelligence data. Her ‘explanations’ are simply impossible for anyone who has held clearances to accept and here’s why:

Initially, Mrs. Clinton said she never sent or received classified information via her private account, yet she confirms she never used an approved, secure account. She later modified that claim to receiving “no information that was classified at the time” of receipt and later still “none that was marked classified at the time” of receipt. (Her most recent explanation that she “… did nothing wrong: The rules are ridiculous …” is an instance of self-incrimination that will likely be cited in security briefings for decades to come.)

There are three classifications: Confidential, Secret, and Top Secret. Each has specific handling protocols and everyone authorized access, at any level, understands the requirements and has signed an oath to protect the information that comes into their possession. Every such individual has been briefed and has acknowledged understanding of both the information and the protection requirements. Mrs. Clinton’s claim that markings are the way she would have known material was classified is simply insulting.

Within Top Secret is information known as “Sensitive Compartmented Information” or SCI. The Compartmented part of SCI means the information is so sensitive that it is protected with special markings in addition to the classification and is releasable only to a limited community who have the clearances, a verified need to know, and specific formal authorization to receive information in that compartment. Each SCI compartment requires a separate briefing and agreement. When duties change, the individual is ‘debriefed’ and their access is terminated. Nobody with TS/SCI access has any question what data is so designated and what protections are required, including how to transmit or receive the data. It is the responsibility of every TS/SCI designated individual to know the “secrets,” recognize them, and immediately notify a security officer whenever such data has been improperly handled or improperly marked.

“Secure Channels” exist because people do make mistakes and improperly mark or fail to mark classified information. Keeping the information inside approved channels means a failure to mark a paragraph or document is an administrative error and ‘need to know’ would be breached but the information would not be compromised because secure systems verifiably record the originator and recipients of all traffic. I am certain Mrs. Clinton knew the emails were classified but if I am wrong, that is much worse. Her ignorance of, or disregard for, the data itself and the protection regimens is stunning.

We know some of the information found in her e-mails was generated inside the intelligence community. It would have been reviewed by multiple layers of authority before being released to State. Unquestionably, it was marked when sent. There would be no ‘dispute’ about classification or handling because the originator’s classification stands until a formal declassification process is completed. Because secure systems have no path to insecure systems, for that data to reach her private server without markings means someone removed the markings, transferred the data to media without approval, then uploaded that clandestine media into an insecure system and sent it to Mrs. Clinton. Whatever the information was, the U. S. must presume that billions of dollars investment in sensitive sources and methods has been compromised and will become useless in the future as targets implement countermeasures.

Those who say this is “no big deal” or that it is “just political” are either unspeakably ignorant or unspeakably disingenuous. It is a huge deal and everyone who understands the weight of the already known facts can only abhor her judgment and allegiance as most do her honesty and trustworthiness. Equally serious questions (for another time): Why her server was knowingly tolerated throughout her tenure as Secretary of State, why months went by before it was seized, and why she has not been placed in custody and ‘interviewed’ at length as would anyone else who had purposefully violated their sworn responsibilities.

———

Another View, a Maine Press Association award-winning column, is written on a rotating basis by a member of a group of Mid-coast citizens that meet to discuss issues they think are of public interest.