re: #220 Great White Snark

Sure all 3 correctly face no legal issues for violating any policy, because the policy changed later. Got it. Thing is though the hacking threat grows with time. So back when, the threat was less so the risk less in proportion. It’s bullshit to hold this over her head as per the GOP breathless agitprop. Like Benghazi, the fact better security would have been better need not equate to a big cloud over her head. That writer simply should be able to say so without taking heat just because the GOP played it big as Fox.

Do you really know all the writer’s motive for the article? It is something to wonder about due to it being an election too. Pretty hard to separate them, so questions are natural.