> This is what intent to break the law looks like:

No it is not. "nonpaper" means scrap off all sensitive data and send it nonsecure. Comey explained what she meant in this email; long version would be: "okay, remove all the sensitive information from this note so that you can lawfully send it via non-secure line; then go ahead and do it".

No intent here.

This is correct, and I'm confused that HN seems to find it downvote-worthy.

When I worked for the State Department, that phrase meant 'digitize it'. When did the meaning change?

1) Talking points don't contain classified information--that's why they are "talking" points.

2) Other evidence showed that this particular set of talking points ended up being sent by secure fax anyway.

1) This is not true.

2) That's why I said this is what intent looks like -- I'm not making any claims about whether she did in fact break any laws. I have no way of knowing that.

> I don't know what the right answer is here, but I am certain that I don't find incompetence a better excuse than malfeasance.

In the United States there are laws regarding criminal negligence, and hypothetically speaking, if someone died as a result of her criminal negligence, it would be considered criminally negligent homicide in most states and could result in prosecution and a real prison sentence.

Would she ever be tried or found guilty of it? Based on the outcome so far, I doubt it; the powerful and connected rarely fall. But the standard does exist.