Dan Abrams (who has pretty much predicted this outcome all along, disputes your finding. As far as #2, I just don't care enough to spend the energy to look in it any further. Kaplan has the background and expertise to make a pretty sound determination, but feel free to email him if you disagree.==============================

This is my lowly badge...so what do I know?

You absolutely do not need willful intent to charge someone with Title 18 USC 793 (f).  

Let us go to the Lord in Scripture: (f)

Amen. Now, why the highlights?

1) According to the FBI, there is evidence Clinton was "extremely careless" in handling "very sensitive, highly classified information."

If you are an English major (or student of legal concepts), then one can deduce that extreme carelessness = gross negligence. Meets the criteria for 793 (f) But wait...there's more!

2) Comey said for the record:  "There is evidence to support a conclusion that any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton's position, or in the position of those government employees with whom she was corresponding about these matters, should have known that an unclassified system was not place for that conversation. In addition to this highly sensitive information, we also found information that was properly classified as Secret by the US Intelligence Community at the TIME IT WAS DISCUSSED"...
Only a small number of emails bore marking 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."

So, here we have it. Maybe a small in number, but there were emails marked classified. Even if they were not marked, the Secretary of State can surely recognize sensitive intelligence information when she sees it, right? That, or she's a mouthbreathing moron...which she is not. WHERE ARE YOU GOING WITH THIS AGENT BAMMERFAN? Glad you asked. "Having knowledge that the same...fails to make prompt report." So, here we have a cabinet secretary with emails marked classified, and emails that the lowest plebe with a clearance would have recognized as classified on a server in her basement. Are you telling me she didn't see the classification markings, or is too stupid to determine what is or is not classified?

Clinton is a highly educated person, who is obviously bright and well-heeled in government information sharing. Soooo...she didn't immediately report having marked classified emails sent to her on her private, unclassified server? Yep, check that mark off on 793 (f).

Let us review: Gross negligence, check. Knowing that classified information is being disseminated outside of government control and security policy, check. Failure to report violation of said security policies, check. Slam dunk violation of Title 18 USC 793 (f).

Now a reality check. Comey is right. We rarely (I've never personally seen it happen, though it has) prosecute people for being ginormous dumbasses without an established foreign nexus and/or malicious intent. We instead take pleasure in making sure they never hold a security clearance or position (civil servant or contractor) with the federal government again. US Attorneys aren't interested in spending time in court for such matters, especially because they are likely losers when people can afford good lawyers or have powerful friends in high places. Anyone in the rank and file would be flipping burgers right now. The people up in arms about the FBI are directing their anger in the wrong place. Prosecution is rare, but not unprecedented (at least as far as non-senior members of the government go...the ruling class have different rules). There was no way they were going to prosecute her for a violation 793 (f) just to let her waltz out with an easy win in court. It would be stupid, and a waste of time.

That being said, she is in direct violation of 793 (f). This is incontrovertible according to Comey's statement. He didn't say she wasn't guilty, he said no prosecutor would take the case. There is no amount of spin you can apply to it without making an ass of yourself and revealing your partisan GroupThink credentials. Her not being charged does not erase her culpability. The difference between the peasants and the ruling class separate here; she will go on with her life of privilege, while anyone else would be trying to put their life back together and never sniffing government gain. If you are OK with that, then more power to you. Equality, right? Others have done it so I'm good with my peeps doing it. etc. etc.