But there was no INTENT to break the law.
No INTENT to expose classified, secret, top secret, SAP, etc. information to ANYONE not cleared for such information.
Therefore.....she skates.
As I recall , she canned an ambassador for using an unsanctioned email private account
so , isn't she guilty of hypocrisy at least, and duplicity ?
The last I knew, and was taught, is that ignorance of the law is no excuse .
How can she not be held to the same standard that she enforced ?
Using a personal email account and private server constitute GROSS NEGLIGENCE and CRIMINAL WILLFUL INTENT to break the law.
Why does a public servant need a private server? Why?
If the person was being upstanding, working within the rule of law, upholding the oath that was sworn, all of their email traffic would have been on the classified State server, since everything this position does is CLASSIFIED, right?
If you are saying this is the lying crap the Obama administration will spew as an excuse for corrupt non-enforcement, ok — you are probably right. Otherwise, please cite the legal basis for your assertion that proof of intent is required in this type of case.
The law is specifically written so that proving intent is not required.
Suppose Boris Rodhamovich Badanov is arrested sneaking out of the Pentagon, with a memory chip containing all US nuclear plans, with the Top Secret/NOFORN labels removed. Boris says he has no documents marked classified, thought they were pretty, and in his mind intended to use them solely in a peaceful art project.
Would the government have to prove intent to commit espionage?