>>It's not code for me saying the AG should of made the declaration (although I agree with that) -- I'm merely pointing out that the conclusion was there was nothing to prosecute. If the AG would of said it too then perhaps it would of made people like you happier?? Doubt it...so why bother?

As a lawyer, she'd have more difficulty with the legal fiction that lack of intent excuses negligence. Would she have said it to protect HRC? We'll never know.

>>Of course it can -- you just have to be stupid lol A crime is still a crime if there are witnesses to it.

How about a conspiracy? On national TV?

Question for you: say the Russians responded to Trump by releasing the destroyed 30,000 emails and there was no classified information, just personal stuff as HRC had asserted. Would that be a criminal conspiracy? Perhaps you assume the emails were full of classified material that shakes the nation that the Russians were able to get it, so damages HRC's chances. You're still fixated that Trump is the criminal conspirator for suggesting they release it? If there was a real life conspiracy, why would he even need to say that?!

How about if Trump paid Russians to say that HRC was peed on by prostitutes when she was in Moscow for Bill's big speech and then released it via a Dem stooge to keep his hands clean. Would that be a criminal conspiracy?