One of the elements of res mensa is recklessness. The precise definition of recklessness has been contested and has evolved. It generally involves a person pursuing a course of action while consciously disregarding the fact that the action gives rise to a substantial and unjustifiable risk.
That’s what she did.
Quite right. My point is that the case becomes problematic if the intent element is applied rather than a gross negligence element. Which is what Comey did in order to support his conclusion. As someone argued elsewhere, Comey was proceeding as a defense attorney might with a theory that might be difficult for a jury.
IMO, Gowdy should not have entertained an intent discussion but should have focused on her gross negligence. (He may have; I haven't read a transcript of the event.)
Almost everyone would agree that purposely operating a unauthorized scheme for several years that effectively posted our nation's top secret information in the public squares of hostile environments for the benefit of hostile actors - is grossly negligent even if one did not desire a hostile result.