LIS WIEHL: General Petraeus, he intentionally shared classified information with somebody who was not able to get this information, did not have that classification, was not able to get it under violation of 18USC1924. So, here the argument that Comey would be making is that she did not intentionally share information with anybody that did not have that classification. There was no intent there and the context was different from Petraeus, so then we get into the non-intentional act, and that is the gross negligence act.

HEATHER CHILDERS (HOST): And we’ll talk about that in just a minute. But yeah, we did hear him say “willfully,” did not willfully do this either.

BOB BIANCHI: Yeah, Heather, actually that's the one quote that I pull out of his entire statement. I've been saying this since this investigation began. U.S. attorneys want to have a case that is lock, stock, and barrel, that can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt to 12 people. 80 percent of the cases that have been brought to the Department of Justice under the Espionage Act in cases like this have resulted not in prosecutions and it is prosecutorial discretion to want to see a person that was intentionally doing something to harm the United States, and I agree with Lis completely, this analogy between this case and the Petraeus case is completely different. It was giving information to somebody who was going to disseminate that publicly, and there was an allegation of obstruction of justice. 

CHILDERS: Okay, so that is different.

Previously:

Fox Guest Debunks Host's Comparison Of Clinton Email Investigation To Petraeus Case

Nine Times Reporters Botched The Facts On Hillary Clinton's Emails

Conservatives Lose Their Excuse To Question The Results Of The Clinton Email Investigation

Months Of Media Speculation About Clinton Criminality All For Naught