Its "code language" because you are inferring a meaning rather than stating what you mean.
So you say Hillary Clinton possessed classified material?
Ok, what was it? Was the investigation into her email server that concluded no classified material was found wrong? If so how?
I used to work for Sunblock Systems, one of the companies that did forensic recovery on the server. Was there something they and others did wrong? (I was not emoyed with them at the time) What did everyone miss that you are aware of?
Could it be that "no reasonable person would indict" means they did not find shit? Sometimes prosecutors do find stuff but don't indict but we can always point to what they found.
Like Trump University was found to violate the law in calling themselves a University and they were found to have engaged in fraud but they did not indict because they settled.
See? Evidence of crime but no indictment because an agreement was made.
Now, what was found of Clinton's email server and what settlement was made?