Sure. I only come to that conclusion because you fail to address three fourths of my posting.
There is no evidence of law breaking. In fact, we have dueling "spokespersons":
http://thehill.com/policy/technology/234487-hillarys-emails-not-technically-illegal
Hillary Clinton's exclusive use of a personal email account to conduct official business as secretary of State caused seems to have stayed within the law, experts say.
“What she did was not technically illegal,” said Patrice McDermott, a former National Archives staffer and the head of the Open The Government coalition, a transparency group.
There was no law broken. At best there
could have been a policy breach, but even then it's considered a moot point. She emailed people on their government accounts, which means all information was archived on government servers. I think 16.5 is under the impression that only outgoing emails are saved to the server. What with the NSA being able to hack the world, you'd think they'd clear this up right proper!
ETA:“Like secretaries of State before her, she used her own email account when engaging with any department officials,” spokesman Nick Merrill said in a statement. “For government business, she emailed them on their department accounts, with every expectation they would be retained.”
I said this same thing in the Benghazi thread, but it will most assuredly be ignored. It's like saying the email server was "one she controlled". It's just a scare tactic.
"Controlling" an email server is the same as "controlling" an email account. There aren't many added benefits, or significant power that comes with it. I run my own email, dhcp, ftp, and minecraft (a game for my son) server at my house. It's just easier to maintain it that way. I still use my commercial email for almost everything. It's just neato to have an @firstnamelastname.com\org\whatever email account. They used to be easier to link to phones as well, but now you can link almost any commercial email in a matter of seconds.
Which is why am asking questions about what specifically she did that was illegal, what were the consequences, etc.
Nothing illegal about it at all. She followed protocol in that she did all official business through .gov accounts by emailing the recipient on their .gov accounts. It's all archived, and I would almost guarantee most of the emails that were turned over were duplicates of what the committee already had. Some people even said emails were a waste of time as most conversations about something so serious would have been done in real-time. On the phone, chat program, etc.
Because otherwise, it just seems like outrage because of who she is.
If you could see me right now, I would be tapping the side of my nose with my finger.
