Since the Hillary emails seem to be a "thing" again let's just remember this...

[Agschmid]

"On the surface it sounds damning. The Secretary of State potentially sent top secret information through her personal account, even though there’s evidently a law that says she’s not allowed to use a personal account for government business — sounds outrageous. But like many of the bombshell news stories we’ve witnessed in the last couple of years, it all falls apart under the most cursory level of scrutiny.

1) The article quotes a lawyer affiliated with the National Archives who set the tone for the outrage

“It is very difficult to conceive of a scenario — short of nuclear winter — where an agency would be justified in allowing its cabinet-level head officer to solely use a private email communications channel for the conduct of government business,” said Jason R. Baron, a lawyer at Drinker Biddle & Reath who is a former director of litigation at the National Archives and Records Administration.

A nuclear winter! Interesting, because the article goes on to note that numerous other State Department and other government officials have used private email accounts, partially or exclusively, including Secretary of State Colin Powell who only used a personal email account.

snip//

None of this has stopped the Twitter jihad, and especially conservatives on Twitter, from jumping to all kinds of wildly uninformed, unthinking conclusions in spite of the fact that it appears we have yet another dubiously-reported bombshell. It might not be as over-the-top dubious at some of the NSA reporting of 2013-14, but it’s definitely in the same territory. No laws were apparently broken, as far as we know, and the article completely fails to show hard evidence of irresponsible email transmissions by Clinton. Should she have used a government email account? Probably. But does this warrant what’s surely going to be 20 months of indignation and investigations from both the right — and the anti-Hillary left? No way.

snip//

4. At the time Clinton was Secretary, the Federal Records Act didn’t require federal employees to use government accounts, only to preserve records of their communications. This, Clinton seems to have done.

http://thedailybanter.com/2015/03/story-hillary-clintons-private-email-account-isnt-awful-seems/

[hr]
Thanks Cha.

[Cha]

1. Oh funny.. you're quick! I'm going to repost my highlights again here.. you don't mind, do you?

snip//

"On the surface it sounds damning. The Secretary of State potentially sent top secret information through her personal account, even though there’s evidently a law that says she’s not allowed to use a personal account for government business — sounds outrageous. But like many of the bombshell news stories we’ve witnessed in the last couple of years, it all falls apart under the most cursory level of scrutiny.

1) The article quotes a lawyer affiliated with the National Archives who set the tone for the outrage

“It is very difficult to conceive of a scenario — short of nuclear winter — where an agency would be justified in allowing its cabinet-level head officer to solely use a private email communications channel for the conduct of government business,” said Jason R. Baron, a lawyer at Drinker Biddle & Reath who is a former director of litigation at the National Archives and Records Administration.

A nuclear winter! Interesting, because the article goes on to note that numerous other State Department and other government officials have used private email accounts, partially or exclusively, including Secretary of State Colin Powell who only used a personal email account.

snip//

None of this has stopped the Twitter jihad, and especially conservatives on Twitter, from jumping to all kinds of wildly uninformed, unthinking conclusions in spite of the fact that it appears we have yet another dubiously-reported bombshell. It might not be as over-the-top dubious at some of the NSA reporting of 2013-14, but it’s definitely in the same territory. No laws were apparently broken, as far as we know, and the article completely fails to show hard evidence of irresponsible email transmissions by Clinton. Should she have used a government email account? Probably. But does this warrant what’s surely going to be 20 months of indignation and investigations from both the right — and the anti-Hillary left? No way.

snip//

4. At the time Clinton was Secretary, the Federal Records Act didn’t require federal employees to use government accounts, only to preserve records of their communications. This, Clinton seems to have done.

MOre.. I just snipped and snipped..
http://thedailybanter.com/2015/03/story-hillary-clintons-private-email-account-isnt-awful-seems/

[Agschmid]

2. Nope!

[Agschmid]

3. Not

[Agschmid]

4. At

[Agschmid]

5. All

[Cha]

6. Wonder if it will get any

attention by those who need to understand the "Hillary's rw email scandal" better?

[Agschmid]

7. I don't honestly care.

And FWIW people already have likely made up their minds, and that is their right.

But it's my right to post some positive stuff.

[Cha]

8. Right.. nice to know the facts, though. Thanks for your positivety!