Are any Democrats concerned by this?

Sorry, but...she really is "the only to have ever done this".

Fact-checking Hillary Clinton's claim that her email practices were 'allowed'

But you were still going to vote for him right ?

Trump bothers me a lot, but his bullshit is covered quite well here. Anytime Hillary's bullshit is mentioned it's always "yes, but it's okay because..." or "it doesn't count because...".

Her bullshit is covered quite well too you make sure of it.

Personally, I do think the emails are a big deal, and here's why: AP- "Experts: Clinton emails could have compromised CIA names "

Well if you can show me where you've (or anyone) posted the dead horse on the repeated lie, I'll stop "telling myself that."

Big effing difference, krazy...Patraeous, Bush Administration, and the Senate knew they outed those people...Clinton isn't sure if she accidentally did or didn't.  She may have, she might not have...point is, it wasn't in her control - or the government's control.  It was just...hanging out there...you know, for anyone to see.

Just so that I can get a grip on this conversation - it's worse when it is possibly done by accident through incompetence than doing it through premeditated purpose? 

It's ALL wrong.  The point is, we don't even know what damage has been done with Hillary's emails/server.  The damage was discovered and dealt with in the other mentioned instances...with Hillary - no one knows, yet.

It's not that he also did it it's how he did it.  There is a difference and it is he intended to release classified information when he made the decision to give his mistress/biographer his notebooks that resulted in him being charged with a misdemeanor.  A misdemeanor for deliberately giving a third party classified information. 

Hillary's choice to use a private server was not made with the intent to put our security/her emails at risk. Especially since her privacy was one of the core reasons she decided to use her own server.  

We still don't how unsecured this server of hers was.  People are just assuming that because it was her private server it was automatically unsecured and at risk.   However when this first started I read she used the server set up for her husband the ex president of the US.   Now I can't see any ex president of the US having a server that didn't have more security then the average private server.  Actually I would imagine anyone who wanted to keep their privacy, with money, would have a pretty secured server.  That is why they have a private server.

Anyway the key word in this mess is "intent".   Petraeus made the intentional decision to release classified information.   Bush & Co made the intentional decision to out active undercover CIA operative Valerie Plame.

Hillary Clinton did not make the decision to use a private server for government emails with the intent to put the country's  national security at risk.  Bone head move, yes but not with the intent to release classified information.

There is a difference.

They are both despicable.

It goes beyond a mistake and she has clearly shown intent.
She deliberately stopped aides from sending documents securely and had them send classified documents through an unsecured process, she deliberately violated State Department record keeping rules, and she deliberately deleted documents AFTER a federal request for them (documents that weren't personal). As I said early on, nobody deletes innocent documents if they want to prove their transparency. 

No only one of them has shown himself to be a despicable human being. 

And to ignore him when he shows his true self is to be despicable as well.