LOL! Well, did you hear the rabid judge that disagreed with the Director? He's on the panel and tried to school the Director that "INTENT" was not to be used in applying the law.in the 99 years since the espionage act was created, only 1 person was prosecuted for gross negligence and that person was careless and had intent to commit espionage....
It's you, who want to change the law and precedence on this issue....
exactly. just goes to show the typical gaping whole in their everyday attempts at logic.
newsflash: "the average American" is not acting as Secretary of State of the U.S.A. until maybe they are, in which case the end result of these same circumstances would be the very same non prosecution.
so sorry rabid hacks, the U.S.A. doesn't take prosecuting our SoS frivolously.
"our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case."