Even the New York Times has noticed in a lead editorial titled Hillary Clinton, Drowning in Email.

Hillary Clinton’s campaign for the presidency just got harder with the release of the State Department inspector general’s finding that “significant security risks” were posed by her decision to use a private email server for personal and official business while she was secretary of state. Contrary to Mrs. Clinton’s claims that the department had “allowed” the arrangement, the inspector general also found that she had not sought or received approval to use the server.
…
When Republicans first questioned the propriety of using her own home-based server over a year ago, Mrs. Clinton sought to finesse the matter as partisan flak. Under pressure, she eventually apologized for a “mistake,” while insisting she had done nothing wrong and would cooperate fully with investigators. But she did not honor that promise, according to the report, which noted that she declined to be interviewed by the inspector general, Steve Linick, or his staff.

When State Department staff members questioned her use of a nongovernmental email address in 2010, the report said, they were instructed by superiors “never to speak of the secretary’s personal email system again.” The sharply critical report found that, contrary to her earlier insistence that the practice was “allowed,” Mrs. Clinton had not sought permission to use the server, and that permission would have been denied under the department’s evolving policy to better protect Internet communications.

One of the hot topics, a topic that was not covered in the New York Times editorial, is whether or not Clinton’s email server was hacked by foreign governments. Clinton, naturally, claims her server, unlike those at OPM, Defense, the White House, and the State Department, was never hacked:

“We have received no indication from any government agency to support these claims, nor are they reflected in the range of charges that Guccifer already faces and that prompted his extradition in the first place. And it has been reported that security logs from Secretary Clinton’s email server do not show any evidence of foreign hacking.”

Note the narrowly parsed statement “received no indication”, “reflected in the range of charges”, and “it has been reported.” Clintonian non-denial right down to the last consonant.

The Romanian hacker, Marcel Lehel Lazar, aka “Guccifer”, has claimed that he hacked Clinton’s account and plead guilty this week to hacking email accounts belonging to Colin Powell and Sidney Blumenthal. The latter is critical because Blumenthal’s email included some highly classified material that seems to have originated at CIA and that demonstrates he knew Hillary Clinton’s email address. It is sort of ridiculous to think that he did not hack her server when he was obsessed with hacking celebrities and Hillary’s server had nothing that vaguely resembled security for most of her tenure at State.

Indeed, the State Department IG report reveals that not only was Clinton’s server subject to hacking attempts, but that she and her coterie of catchfarts knew that it was targeted, and they did not obey State Department regulations and report the hacking attempt. From page 40

Notice that Footnote 159?

Based on this, we know there were several occasions in which there were hacking attacks against Clinton’s server and there is one documented case of her staff saying that it had been hacked. These are the instances of which her staff was aware. We also know that despite an affirmative requirement to report these hack attacks to the State Department that Hillary did not do so.

There is zero doubt, anywhere, that Hillary’s server was a flea market for any foreign intelligence server with the ambition to try to attack it. She didn’t tell State of the attacks because she knew it would draw unwelcome attention from US cybersecurity specialists.