Here's the problem with all the discussion of intent. Read the statute. You're missing a key point.

Under 793f, the criminal act is causing the material to be placed into an unsecure environment. If you want to postulate that "intent" is implied by "gross negligence" (which is not settled), then the only intent that is required is the intent to commit the illegal act, i.e., to put the classified material into the unsecure environment. You don't have to intend for it to be hacked by the Russians or anyone else.

Was the material classified?
Did you know, or should you have known, that it was classified?
Did you put, or cause it to be put, into an unsecure environment?
Did you intend to put, or cause it to be put, into that unsecure environment?

That's it. Slam dunk guilty. I don't see how the answer to any of those questions can be "no." Do you?

And even if Hillary could answer "no" to any of those questions, there is clearly someone on her staff who could not. Send that person away to Leavenworth for 40. And then you get into the conspiracy section of the law.