There is an article today in the Chicago Tribune that says the ‘intent’ was not there to harm national security so she will be ‘exonerated’
these people are bending over backwards to help her
Yes, as you pointed out -- the waterboys for Clinton are twisting themselves into pretzels to avoid the elephant in the room.
(That's not bad: 3 metaphors in the same sentence!)
And as I pointed out earlier, the commentary is just flat wrong. Intent has nothing to do with it. All the FBI has to do is show that Clinton was grossly negligent in handling classified material.
If it had been a handful of isolated instances, Clinton could have avoided a criminal prosecution. But, she would have had her clearance terminated, and that would have made it difficult for her to do her job, if she was still SoS.
This is a classic example of ignorant journalism. I wouldn't write an article on quantum mechanics without doing a lot of research. No respectable journalist should be writing an article or commentary on this issue without at least reading the law. They could also read Clinton's SF-312 (which states her responsibilities), and even the US governments own publications on what the SF-312 means -- it's open access.