So, I agree with you. She violated the letter of the law. The argument that the FBI director is making is that the law, while saying that negligence is also a v

So, I agree with you. She violated the letter of the law. The argument that the FBI director is making is that the law, while saying that negligence is also a violation, has never been tested with regard to negligence. It has only been used to convict people who intentionally released secrets. The FBI director is right that it is novel application of the law, but that does not mean we don't attempt to apply it. That's my problem, is that the spirit of the law is clear in this case, but he's saying we shouldn't attempt to prosecute because it would be a novel application, regardless of the spirit. In the end, we will have to hold our breath and wait for the AG to make a decision. I believe if I were in her shoes, I'd be praying that I received a minor fine for contempt of court, because of the statement that was made that the server was in use to make it possible to use only one phone. She obviously lied, there, because they found that multiple devices had been used. Her campaign would benefit from her admitting that she misspoke, and facing a slap on the wrist, because many will see it as her having done nothing wrong but lying. If she doesn't even get the slap on the wrist, she could be torn apart by a willing opponent (or motivated super PAC). That's just my feeling on it, though. It remains to be seen if she will even get a slap on the wrist and it remains to be seen whether the American people even care about the scandal.