Note that NOTHING I wrote pertained to the legality of what she did, nor suggested that I agreed with what any predecessor did.
It is easily observed that over time, email has greatly replaced other ways to communicate.
I DO think it great that the State Department is working to get ALL Secretaries' emails that were on personal accounts.
However, Media Matters concentrates on the emails being on personal accounts - and ignores comments (sometimes from the same source) that work related emails written on personal accounts should be archived. I seriously doubt that when that was written the spirit of that requirement meant they could be saved on a server in Secretary's home -- even after she left office.
As to the silly comment that no one asked for them, that would have meant that they knew they existed. Additionally, it seems that to get them it had to be pushed up to Chief of Staff level.
At any rate, I have explained at length why I think it wrong. You clearly disagree. However, I know exactly what my reasons for believing what I believe -- and nothing that Media Matters has written has changed my opinion.
The basic reason is that these should have been State Department records and they should have been in State Department possession. As to why it is at least subtlety different than Rice's, Powell's and Allbright's - is that as she was part of Obama's administration AND there have been many investigations (that they found nothing does not excuse withholding documents). It is NOT good government and it might mean that (however unintentionally) the State Department did not give the committees everything that they should have.
It was not the private email, but that Clinton did not give copies of the emails to State Department.
= new reply since forum marked as read