If this were Snopes, they'd most likely use their True/False category where they state what is true and what is false:

True: Clinton's team destroyed emails on the server False: the process didn't leverage "acid wash", but something called BleachBit

Or something to that effect. Not a Snopes writer.

To give a recurring example, this is like the debate on gun control and when someone says "automatic weapons" or "assault rifles" and the other party attempts to shut it down there. That is what the tweet effectively attempts to do (countering the intent of the message by discrediting verbiage).