La giocata di Comey

(f) Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer— Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both. 
18 U.S. Code § 793 - Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information

I have not coordinated or reviewed this statement in any way with the Department of Justice or any other part of the government. They do not know what I am about to say.

Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.

None of these e-mails should have been on any kind of unclassified system, but their presence is especially concerning because all of these e-mails were housed on unclassified personal servers not even supported by full-time security staff, like those found at Departments and Agencies of the U.S. Government—or even with a commercial service like Gmail. 

Only a very small number of the e-mails containing classified information bore markings indicating the presence of classified information. But even if information is not marked “classified” in an e-mail, participants who know or should know that the subject matter is classified are still obligated to protect it.

Given that combination of factors, we assess it is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton’s personal e-mail account.

Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case. 

In looking back at our investigations into mishandling or removal of classified information, we cannot find a case that would support bringing criminal charges on these facts.
Fbi

Il direttore dell'Fbi ha intessuto il proprio ragionamento sul doppio binario giudiziario-politico.

Da ex public prosecutor di livello era perfettamente conscio del fatto che un caso così presentato, con indizi molto gravi che lui stesso ha illustrato sottolineando le bugie raccontate da Hillary, non avrebbe comunque buon esito in un'aula di tribunale. C'è poca differenza tra extremely careless e gross negligence ma evidentemente non basta. Una incriminazione servirebbe semplicemente a rendere più incandescente il clima elettorale. Clima che si è comunque infuocato a causa della bizzarra decisione di rendere pubblico il suggerimento che darà a Loretta Lynch. L'effetto però sarà sempre meno incisivo che se avesse deciso in senso contrario. Per un verso ha permesso alla Clinton di proseguire il cammino elettorale, mostrando però il suo comportamento molto borderline.
D'altro canto ha lanciato un assist formidabile ai repubblicani.
Ha salvato se stesso ma soprattutto i suoi uomini che hanno fatto un lavoro massacrante tra decine di migliaia di email, server ormai chiusi e dispositivi elettronici vari.

Vedremo se davanti al congresso domani gli verranno fatte le domande giuste alla ricerca di spiegazioni circa questo comportamento e come se la caverà con le risposte.