He viewed himself as a scholar of history as well as chief justice. He loved American history.
He really reveled in this kind of thing -- American history and the history of the court,
I'm sure other special prosecutors have felt frustrated, but the general norm has been that if there's no criminal conduct found, people button their lips, wrap it up and move on.
He was very scrupulous about anything involving the court's business. He said he is going to let history pass judgment on his role on that.
I believe she reached a correct decision in this case. One could make the argument that as long as you can get it from the school premises on a computer that it is all of a sudden subject to the same regulation as if it was produced in school. But that would be a dangerous approach to take.