PHILADELPHIA (CBS) – Reactions from political opponents to Hillary Clinton were swift and intense following the announcement from FBI Director James Comey that he would not recommend the former Secretary of State be indicted for using a private email server while heading the Department.

During an interview with Dom Giordano on Talk Radio 1210 WPHT, Pennsylvania Senator Pat Toomey said he does not understand Comey’s reasoning.

“He uses this new term that he’s invented, which is ‘extreme carelessness,’ but if somebody is guilty of extreme carelessness, how is that not gross negligence? What’s the difference? Why is he insisting that the only relevant standard is criminal intent, when the stature clearly says something different? I don’t get it.”

He called for yet another investigation in the matter, hoping the Senate will take up the challenge.

“I think the Senate Judiciary Committee ought to bring him in, ought to insist on all the documentation on this. Nothing stops the Senate from doing its own investigation. The FBI investigation is now concluded apparently, so let’s take a look a that and let’s find out what exactly were the examples of the extreme carelessness. Extreme carelessness with what? Classified information? Using private servers when traveling abroad in countries where we know they routinely tap into all kinds of electronic communications?”

Andrew McCarthy, a writer at National Review and former federal prosecutor, expressed a similar point of view with Senator Toomey in the interpretation of Comey’s description of extreme carelessness.

“If it was a gross negligence case, let’s say that they brought a prosecution against somebody under that statute, at the end of a criminal trial, the judge instructs the jury on what the law is, which involves, also, defining the terms of the statute so the jury can understand the law that it is supposed to apply. I think if a judge had to define gross negligence for a jury, what you would say is it means extreme carelessness. To me, there is no difference between the two.”

He believes Comey ventured too far into the political sphere when announcing that no indictment is warranted.

“He went out of his way, not only to make a recommendation he didn’t need to make, he then gilded the lily by saying, and by the way, no reasonable prosecutor could disagree with where I’ve come out. For whatever reason, and I can’t read his mind on this, he clearly wanted this to go away as a criminal matter, no matter how fraught it is politically with respect to the election. What I object to with respect to that is his job is to do the criminal matter and leave the politics to the politicians.”