That is worded in a way to mean that she did not have "intent" and therefore what she did was not illegal, which is false as the relevant laws cover negligence too.
If you actually look at the laws they are obviously violated
18 U.S. Code § 793 - Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information
"Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing...note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody… or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody…and fails to make prompt report…shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both."
Her personal email server was not the proper place of custody for classified information. This covers both negligence and intent.
18 U.S. Code § 798 - Disclosure of classified information
"(a) Whoever knowingly and willfully communicates, furnishes, transmits, or otherwise makes available to an unauthorized person, or publishes, or uses in any manner prejudicial to the safety or interest of the United States or for the benefit of any foreign government to the detriment of the United States any classified information—Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both."
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article...ithout-security-clearance-had-access-clintons
Classified information transmitted to "unauthorized persons"
18 U.S. Code §1924 - Unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents or material
“(a) Whoever, being an officer, employee, contractor, or consultant of the United States, and, by virtue of his office, employment, position, or contract, becomes possessed of documents or materials containing classified information of the United States, knowingly removes such documents or materials without authority and with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than one year, or both.”
Same as 793
There are a few possible reasons why did they not recommend she be prosecuted i.e. "what we are deciding now":
1. Plain corruption
2. Obama wanted to protect her for the election
3. Larger implications... Obama himself could even be implicated
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/31077#efmAABABT
4. FBI is investigating the Clinton Foundation (IRS too). It could be an even bigger deal than the emails.
Of course the """"intellectuals"""" here will tell you """"they're just emails"""" and """"she did nothing wrong""""