Nobody is above the law. Not even you Mrs. Clinton. This is a clear case of tampering with evidence.
It actually isn't.
She didn't "wipe her server clean"; no copies of any of Clinton's emails remained on the (non-government?) server, after differentiating between e-mails that belong to the public domain or that she regards as personal/private.
"Tampering with evidence" - evidence of what? That she deleted e-mails?
Evidence of possible gross criminal negligence during the Benghazi attacks, when our ambassador was calling for help and we had troops ready to assist who were not allowed to help him! p.s. she did wipe it clean, i do believe that she ordered everything on there erased!
Well, at least that's a more concrete accusation than I can find within a short timespan. It just seems to me that the act of deleting e-mails in itself is more frowned upon than other practices, because it speaks to the imagination (of the voter) or something.
This number of deleted e-mails (30-32.000) for example is pretty staggering (almost intimidating), but I have no idea how many e-mails politicians exchange on a daily basis (probably the more, the better). Somewhere on this website a question is asked about inbox maintenance and the creator of this question describes the number of 100-1000 as "some" e-mails, when I thought 50 unread items was something to feel guilty about.
Deleting e-mails still seems like an ambiguous act (at worst) to me, and I find it typical that these accusations have to come up with the Presidential Elections in the near future - like some sort of leverage to win voters instead of actual attempts to weed out corruption (which has been hinted at but not actually been proven yet). I have always felt deeply annoyed about this kind of opportunistic finger-pointing and shaming and it makes it hard for me to take the opponent's integrity (in whatever situation) seriously.
I have deep respect for Hillary Clinton and I wish people would generally stop taking down people who actually deserve to be looked up at. Just writing this gives me the feeling that others see this as a green light to criticize/attack her even more. "So, she has a fan eh. Well, I'm not joining in the groupthink, so I'll just ignore all the past successes and focus on this one questionable thing which clearly indicates future disaster or at least some level of shadiness which is personally and principally beneath me." <- actual corruption
Even if it's true that she ordered everything to be erased, so much more negligence and selfishness can be found in the rest of the (political) world and I just hate it how people focus on her because she has been a notable presence (the staggering number of e-mails being evidence of this) for the last decade and like to see her try and fail to create some new political reality (and then complain afterwards). If you had a problem with her then, you should have opened yer yap.
We now know that these e-mails included classified information and that she didn't turn over all the e-mails, including many with clear public relevance. For years, I thought this was a non-scandal, but it really isn't.