Ignatius, David "The Hilary Clinton e-mail 'scandal' that isn't" August 27,2015

The article, written by David Ignatius an Opinion writer for The Washington Post qualifies whether or not the Clinton email scandal is actually the scandal it has been made out to be.  The background of the scandal is as follows, Hilary Clinton used a personal email server as opposed to the federal government server to send emails of a political nature, that may or may not have been classified.  Ignatius repeatedly uses the argument that her choice of using her unauthorized email is not a prosecutable offence, as this is far from the first time information has traveled along an unauthorized route.  The use of the personal email, is technically a crime, but the opinion Ignatius is presenting is how extensive the crime actually is.  Much of the news has been heavily focused on the action of using the server itself, but few focus on the results of any investigation.  It is also mentioned that neither Clinton's email nor the federal government's server were deemed authorized for sending the classified information that is claimed to have been sent by Clinton's choice.  During the heights of the scandal, questions from reporters were unavoidable, and there are many quotes of Clinton continually addressing the emails.  She has stated that it is at her discretion the bulk of her emails was released and there was no sensitive information in the work related and personal emails.

I chose one of the most persistent presidential campaign attacks before the entrance of Donald Trump as a candidate.  I have always been involved and actively trying to understand the chaos that can be our political system and the public response.  Since this story has circulated the media, I have been very confused about what the public was actually considering news.  There simply is no way to guarantee safe passage for information.  There is no 100% secure network that cannot be continually attacked or infiltrated by hackers.  It is amazing to me that the public could so desperately want to have every piece of information about one candidate but ignore the entire Republican compilation of candidates.  I find sexist, derogatory, racist commentary to be far more dangerous in a candidate than what the public has been told of Clinton's mistake, that she so far has aptly addressed.