Another Jeff Carlson article based upon Congressional transcripts. Worth a read.
https://www.theepochtimes.com/exclusive-doj-prevented-fbi-from-pursuing-gross-negligence-charges-against-clinton_2815097.html
So the DOJ informed the FBI that they would not prosecute Clinton for 'gross negligence' for handling classified materials via her unsecured server unless there was proof of intent that she set up the server to handle classified materials...an oxymoron situation if there ever was one. How convenient.
https://www.theepochtimes.com/exclusive-doj-prevented-fbi-from-pursuing-gross-negligence-charges-against-clinton_2815097.html
Quote:
...
The Justice Department (DOJ), under then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch, decided to set an unusually high threshold for prosecution of Clinton, effectively ensuring from the outset that she would not be charged.
In order for Clinton to be prosecuted, the DOJ required the FBI to establish evidence of intent -- even though the gross negligence statute explicitly does not require this......
Rep. Ratcliffe: Okay. So let me if I can, I know I'm testing your memory, but when you say advice you got from the Department, you're making it sound like it was the Department that told you: You're not going to charge gross negligence because we're the prosecutors and we're telling you we're not going to --
Ms. Page: That is correct.
Rep. Ratcliffe: -- bring a case based on that.
.....
So the DOJ informed the FBI that they would not prosecute Clinton for 'gross negligence' for handling classified materials via her unsecured server unless there was proof of intent that she set up the server to handle classified materials...an oxymoron situation if there ever was one. How convenient.