Did any of you actually READ the post?  Check out the senders and receivers?

Well, directly from the post, let's review:

The e-mail was sent via State's unsecured systems by Timmy T Davis to Huma Abedin, Jake Sullivan and Joseph Macmanus. Rena Bitter sent the e-mail to Davis, also via State's unsecured system.

Sent via an unsecured system at STATE, by someone not named Clinton, to people not named Clinton who were also on STATE's unsecured system.

There were no classified markings on the documents prior to FOIA review. A B-5 marking (deliberative exemption, not classified) was added to a note from David to Abedin and Sullivan.

No markings to indicate it was classified; that didn't happen until after the FOIA review, which was after someone-named-Clinton had long left office.

The email chain was forwarded by Jake Sullivan to Hillary Clinton. Sullivan received the forwarded chain from Jones, Beth E, who sent it to - Burns, William J; Sherman, Wendy R; Sullivan, Jacob Cc: Dibble, Elizabeth 1; Roebuck, William V.

Jones received the original e-mail from Roebuck, William V., who sent the email to Jones, Beth E; Maxwell, Raymond D; Abdalla, Alyce N; Sidereas, Evyenia; Miller, James N.

Clinton was one person among - let's count them - SIX people who received or sent the original e-mail.  There is no indication that Clinton forwarded it to anyone else.

This emails had no classification markings prior to FOIA review and were sent over State's unsecured systems.

Again, the original sender/receiver utilized THE GOVERNMENT'S unsecured server, and the e-mail was not marked classified until AFTER the FOIA review.

But assuming it is so, how did this information get in the unsecured State Department system?

Well it was first disseminated at State by Roebuck, the Director of the Office of Maghreb Affairs located apparently at Foggy Bottom.

So, again: someone not named Clinton at the State Department was the original sender.

It is my understanding that, despite the media's and the RW Noise Machines efforts to make this entirely about what-Hillary-Did and how-can-you-trust-someone-like-this, the real issue is an overall investigation of communications into and out of the State Department - one that likely would not have taken place AT ALL had Clinton been exclusively using the State Department's own servers.  You know, the ones that were hacked.  

But instead of the Inspectors General having the completely daunting task of culling e-mails from within the vast State Department system, they were afforded the opportunity to review many, many fewer e-mails as a result of being given the government-related e-mails from Clinton's private server.  

Unfortunately for the conspiracy theorists, the outright Clinton-haters and a media that is wetting its pants in the hope of creating drama where none really exists, many of them so far do not point to Clinton as having a problem distinguishing between classified and un-classified materials.

Please, I beg of you: take your heads out of your nether regions, engage the brain that resides in your head, not where you sit, and understand that this is largely a manufactured controversy, and you are allowing yourselves to be manipulated by it.

One had only to watch the news last night to know why this is all happening: it is thrilling the media to be able to report that this is hurting Clinton, and her poll numbers are dropping.  It is giving a largely insane Republican field multiple orgasms, as well as hope that they actually could win this.

I have seen so many talking heads with so many different claims about possible violations my head is spinning.  One thing for sure the Obama administration seems to have been more aggressive in prosecuting sensitive data violations than any other administration.

But the bottom line still is that Clinton is taking hits from every side about maintaining a personal server that one would reasonably expect to have sensitive information.  To make matters worse that server did not seem to have adequate security.

Hillary seems to be tone deaf in responding to questions about the issue.  Her comment about using a cloth to wipe her server in response to the question about her wiping it was silly and there is no way to sugar coat it.

I saw an interesting comment about how when you try for public office it is assumed you put your self out in public.  A comparison was made between Donald who seems to revel in being in public and Hillary who seems to distain it.

"Out of a sample of approximately 20% of the Clinton emails, the [Intelligence Community] reviewers have only recommended 305 documents -- approximately 5.1% -- for referral to their agencies for consultation," Justice Department lawyer Robert Prince wrote in a court filing related to a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit filed by Vice News." Article.

It would seem that the more emails with potential problems there are, the higher the likelihood that one or more with bigger problems will be found, or whether she forwarded any of those emails. Also, it looks like we're going to see how carefully Clinton's lawyers (and perhaps her people) reviewed these emails, and whether Clinton's prior comments and assurances were accurate and precise. I assume no third party or foreign power tapped into the emails or the server, but I've read that the FBI will, or is likely to be, looking at that too.

It remains to be seen whether any of the "wiped clean" emails from the server will be retrievable.

Like the linked article said, this is like "drip, drip, drip".

I trust you can understand why.