She set up the server in the first place knowing what would be on it.

You seem to still be missing the point of all this. It matters whether she actually removed the information from a SCIF herself, versus "setting up the server in the first place knowing what would be on it," if we're talking about whether she can be prosecuted. Because there are criminal statutes that apply to actions like removing classified information from a SCIF, and those statutes don't apply to actions like setting up a private server knowing that classified information would land on it.


This is the fundamental disconnect you have. Just because two different actions have just as bad impacts on national security (stipulated for discussion) doesn't mean that they both fit into the same criminal statutes. Removing information from a SCIF is different for the purposes of the U.S. Criminal Code than setting up a server. You might think the latter shouldn't be different, but it is. Which is why Clinton wasn't, and can't, be prosecuted for that.