“The furor over Hillary Clinton ’s private email account could accelerate Democratic calls for her to enter the presidential race sooner, a move that would give the former secretary of state a better platform to help shift attention to jobs and economic issues, the core of her 2016 message,” the Wall Street Journal reports.

“With no campaign apparatus in place, Mrs. Clinton has seemed flat-footed in coping with a fast-moving story that some of her family’s closest advisers now say threatens to dog her candidacy.”

Ben Smith: “We got a feel for what kind of a campaign this will be: one that barrels forward with the wheels nearly off at all times. That is, a Clinton campaign. Full of mistakes and tactics and drama and risk — the sort of thing that reporters love to cover, and that Bill Clinton always seemed to feed off.”

Politico: Democrats urge Clinton to launch campaign

“Anyone who has tried to pry information from the federal government may have been surprised on Tuesday by Hillary Clinton’s assertion that in all her emails in four years as secretary of state she never strayed into the classified realm,” the New York Times reports.

“After all, a consensus of both Republicans and Democrats for many years has been that the government routinely overclassifies information, reflexively stamping ‘secret’ on mountains of documents with marginally sensitive content….But some secrecy experts and former government officials on Tuesday were skeptical, noting the interesting turnabout that had a former top official insisting, for once, that none of her exchanges were secret.”

Hillary Clinton “defended her exclusive use of a private email address during her time as secretary of state, saying that she did so as a matter of “convenience,” to make life simpler by using one device and one email account,” the New York Times reports.

“She said that most of her emails were work-related, went to government employees and were captured on government servers. Mrs. Clinton said that the State Department would make public all of her work-related emails, which amount to about 30,000 messages. However, she said that her personal email — about issues such as her daughter’s wedding and the death of her mother — would remain private.”

Washington Post: “Scrambling to extinguish the growing controversy over her unconventional use of a private e-mail server ahead of the expected launch of her 2016 presidential campaign, Clinton said ‘there were no security breaches’ with her private account and that she was pleased the State Department will soon release her work-related e-mails into the public domain.”

A source close to Hillary Clinton tells CBS News that the former secretary of state will speak publicly about her use of a private email account, rather than a government address while she was secretary of state.

First Read: “But Hillary needs to do something more than answer questions; she needs to take action (like give the State Department full control over her email server). No matter what she says, she’s not going to please Republicans and many members of the political press corps. But WHO she needs to satisfy are Democrats — and give them something they can use. And action could go a long way on that front. ”

Rick Klein: “If this is the new Hillary, maybe you also believe this has been a good week for Hillary Clinton and her non-campaign. Some veterans of her last campaign are as baffled as the news media at her handling of the story about her e-mails; ‘aggressively and unresponsively’ is how The Washington Post‘s Dan Balz characterized the way her team has handled questions. Clinton insiders are right in their complaint that no amount of explaining will ever be sufficient. Yes, there’s a different standard for the Clintons – driven by decades of history, suspicions, and rivalries. It’s also driven by her fame – the same fame that allows her to be the frontrunner for the 2016 nomination without the trouble of actually campaigning. Does anyone think this will be the last story like this for the 2016 cycle? Does anyone think the next one should be handled the same way?”

Charlie Cook: “This is the classic kind of inside-the-Beltway, process story that politicos and reporters get in a lather over but that resonates very little with average voters. Most Americans don’t know or care what happens to the old emails of public officials. But chasing shiny objects is an occupational hazard for political journalists during odd-numbered years, because of the infrequent developments of real significance. And, for that matter, Clinton’s fate won’t hinge on Benghazi either…”

“No, Hillary Clinton’s challenge will be determined by how she performs, what image she projects, how she is perceived—whether she comes across as likable and relevant to the future, someone who can plausibly address the challenges facing the country. Having been largely out of the game of politics since losing the Democratic nomination to President Obama in 2008, she is akin to a professional athlete who has been sidelined by injuries for several seasons. Does she still have—to borrow a phrase from the legendary political author, the late Richard Ben Cramer — ‘what it takes,’ or Tom Wolfe’s ‘the right stuff’?”