2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: FBI: Everything on Clinton is 'evidence' or 'potential evidence' [View all]leveymg
(36,418 posts)that applies to most of that which presents a real restriction to any prosecution of Bush-era violations. That's an important practical, as well as legal difference.
There is another difference, one of degree as well as whether the offenses can be prosecuted. The destruction of records crimes of Hillary, I think, is secondary to her disregard for normal procedures of protecting classified information from unauthorized disclosure. The continued use of her Blackberry hooked up to an uncertified private server for all of her official communications, after being expressly warned about her unsecure handheld, is a new low in wholesale disregard for information security rules.
But, far more serious is her violations of Sec. 793 of the Espionage Act. Her private server contained over 2,200 messages and attachments containing classified information. She, herself, not only sent 104 of these classified messages, but encouraged others to do so, as well, in spite of laws that make it a felony to fail to report the observed mishandling of classified materials by others. Perhaps most legally significant, are 22 emails containing information that originated with other agencies previously classified at the Top Secret/SAP level, and five have been identified to reveal the identities of intelligence officers.
No Secretary of State or other high government official has ever mishandled classified materials on this scale, and none is ever likely to again.