Or it appears that I was right based on that. The FBI is parsing the way they frame the investigation. Hillary isn't a target. They are doing a security review. However, if they find anything fishy then is she an actual target or do they just go well that was an oopsy wasn't it?

No such thing.

I never really believed it. It sounds ludicrous on the face of it. If they are investigating the emails and her server she is in fact under investigation, it's her server. Who else would they be investigating?

That is the right word.

That's the crux. The WH press secretary downplayed the investigation the other day, as Obama has done in the past when he stated there would be no finding of criminality. Now the AG has publicly and under oath chastised the WH for commenting.

by the WH. In other words this may be fair.

What exactly does all this mean?

....the "email" scandal is potentially a problem for Obama himself.

It is not an "email" scandal as framed. It is more serious than whether some emails were marked classifed or not classified when Hillary used a private server -- that is simply framing. There is deep concern about the handling of America's secrets within Hillary's network of connections.

We do not know the extent of the investigation. There is a lot that is not being widely reported in the MSM. Why did Hillary move her server to an obscure mom and pop provider in Colorado a couple of months after leaving SoS office -- a provider with ZERO experience in handling government documents, a provider with a deep link to Democrats with old connections to the Clintons? A provider whose facility was a loft apartment and the server was used within a bathroom closet there? A provider with zero security background and an insecure facility.

That is just an example of the complexity of what we do NOT know about this investigation.

The WH spokesman has been warned and Obama has been warned earlier about commenting on the characterization of the investigation, downplaying its seriousness.

Should the FBI find evidence of criminality and report it to AG Lynch, Obama risks a firestorm akin to the Watergate firestorm if he should in any way interfere with the process in order to influence the possibility of prosecution.

In any event, none of us know anything for now. Except the FBI.

Now I understand what's going on! I'll be first to admit I'm a bit slow "getting it".

...from those who still want to see this as a "security review."

action (ie deleting the audio tapes that Nixon did) vs Iran-Contra Obama was able to prove he had no direct knowledge of what people under him had done.

When Bernie filed suit about NGP-VAN and DNC thing he made note that the same thing happened in 2008. Could Obamas data have been leaked to Clinton and Obama found out? Could the Obama administration have given Clinton all the rope she needed?

Don't know. Interesting to speculate about though.