Show sentence to gin up public FEAR
None of the information was classified as top secret or secret, falling into a third category considered confidential. They plead guilty to one felony each conspiracy to communicate restricted data.
The issue here is the Federal Sentencing guidelines. Any lawyer from the Federal Bench will tell you that these Statutory Guidelines are set up as SHOW SENTENCING to spread fear by the Federal Gov agency to send signals to other would-be lawbreakers.
Prosecutors alleged but failed to show the couple had any intent to flee the USA. Documents confirmed that the couple had discussed leaving the US but the reason was they hated Stinky Trump, enough to commit their dislike of Trump in email communications to each other.
This was a plea deal, actually the third plea deal. The judge kept rejecting the plea deals reached by lawyers and prosecutors based on wanting harsher sentencing guidelines. The sentencing guidelines by the court will be appealed. When multiple plea deals are rejected by the court that were approved by prosecutors and attorneys, that is a red flag. The judge has a thin resume, West VA Law school,
I suspect this couple will spend no more than five years in prison.
Suppose you were a nuclear engineer and you contacted a foreign gov to sell some information on nuclear subs. And that query was turned over to the FBI. Suppose in the end you made a deal with the FBI undercover took some crypto and gave them a few packages of fictional material. HAVE YOU COMMITTED A CRIME? Selling fiction is not illegal. The next step up would be selling restricted data, such as a speed test of a nuclear sub. That would be a crime if sold to a foreign gov based on the 1954 ACT. But is selling it to the FBI a crime? The Crime is a conspiracy to communicate restrictive data whether you succeed or not. That was accomplished in the first teaser letters that were given to the FBI. That was the elaborate cat-and-mouse game to see if the couple was selling fiction or restrictive data. Sorry, it is not much of a crime. It is thin.
Compare that to Trump's taking Top Secret, and Secret, and Classified material out the door of the White House and lying by saying all documents had been returned. The FBI then finds documents at Mar-o-Lago. In the Trump case you have a partisan Federal District judge attempting to block the Federal and FBI investigation and in West Virginia, you have a District Judge blocking plea deals by Prosecutors and Attorneys in order to exact more punishment. Both Judges are women with very thin resumes.
As an aside, do I think Trump will be indicted? No. He should be but Garland and Biden expressed long ago this royal fiction that you can't prosecute a standing or former President. It is a good ole boy's club kind of view. Garland has been scrambling and even walked the idea of a special prosecutor, which is insanity and a clear attempt to push this away from his desk. If Trump announces a run for the Presidency then Garland will withhold prosecution in order not to appear biased in an election. It was the same excuse used to stall an indictment before the Midterm elections.
I noticed Trumpers take the hardline with Assange and Snowden and likely this couple but want to treat Trump with kid gloves. I assure you the crimes of Trump are far greater than Assange, Snowden, and this couple. It is this kind of tenor that makes justice in the USA almost impossible. The UK unlike the USA, has extremely well-trained judges. In the US it is the failures at the practice of law that end up as judges and they function as political hacks.
One thing is certain... the more the Gov tries to gin up Fear, the higher the price on the open market. This couple were just flunkies that didn't know what they were doing.