PolitiFact: Comparing Hillary Clinton's emails and Donald Trump's boxes of files (2022)
www.statesman.com

... oon after FBI agents raided his Mar-a-Lago estate, former President Donald Trump posted a statement decrying the "weaponization of the justice system." He called the search "political targeting at the highest level," and contrasted what was happening to him with what happened to his 2016 Democratic opponent.

"Hillary Clinton was allowed to delete and acid wash 33,000 emails AFTER they were subpoenaed by Congress," Trump said Aug. 8 on his social media platform, Truth Social. "Absolutely nothing has happened to hold her accountable."

In the 2016 presidential campaign, chants of "lock her up, lock her up" were regular features at Trump rallies.

While she was never charged, Clinton's use of a private email account for exchanges with her staff during her time as secretary of state drew an FBI investigation.

Now, according to news accounts, the Justice Department is probing Trump and the classified documents he took with him to Mar-a-Lago after he left office. The Justice Department has not responded to questions about the search, so we don't know what, if anything, was removed from the property.

We explore the legal risks Trump faces in a related article. Here, we ask, how do the Clinton and Trump situations compare? ...

Statement by FBI Director James B. Comey on the Investigation of Secretary Hillary Clinton's Use of a Personal E-Mail System (2016)
www.fbi.gov

... I want to start by thanking the FBI employees who did remarkable work in this case. Once you have a better sense of how much we have done, you will understand why I am so grateful and proud of their efforts.

So, first, what we have done:

The investigation began as a referral from the Intelligence Community Inspector General in connection with Secretary Clinton's use of a personal e-mail server during her time as Secretary of State. The referral focused on whether classified information was transmitted on that personal system.

Our investigation looked at whether there is evidence classified information was improperly stored or transmitted on that personal system, in violation of a federal statute making it a felony to mishandle classified information either intentionally or in a grossly negligent way, or a second statute making it a misdemeanor to knowingly remove classified information from appropriate systems or storage facilities.

Consistent with our counterintelligence responsibilities, we have also investigated to determine whether there is evidence of computer intrusion in connection with the personal e-mail server by any foreign power, or other hostile actors. ...

So that's what we found. Finally, with respect to our recommendation to the Department of Justice:

In our system, the prosecutors make the decisions about whether charges are appropriate based on evidence the FBI has helped collect. Although we don't normally make public our recommendations to the prosecutors, we frequently make recommendations and engage in productive conversations with prosecutors about what resolution may be appropriate, given the evidence. In this case, given the importance of the matter, I think unusual transparency is in order.

Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case. Prosecutors necessarily weigh a number of factors before bringing charges. There are obvious considerations, like the strength of the evidence, especially regarding intent. Responsible decisions also consider the context of a person's actions, and how similar situations have been handled in the past. ...