Maybe that’s what the FBI is looking into. She obstructed justice when she deleted those emails. That’s a crime. At the very least she disqualifies herself from being President:
More than a year before Clinton cleaned her server, Congress had subpoenaed documents from the State Department and other federal agencies relative to the attack on the U.S. mission in Benghazi, Libya. At that time, in August 2013, subpoenas were not issued to Secretary of State Clinton herself because the existence of the private server was not known. Congress thought it was looking in all the right places.
When the server became known, Clinton, alone, decided which emails she would send to the State Department for review, and deleted all the rest. That was not her decision to make.
In normal civil litigation practice, when documents are sought for a trial, the parties must issue “litigation holds” to preserve all documents likely to be asked for, well before they are actually demanded and, in some cases, even before a lawsuit is filed. Failure to preserve such documents results in sanctions by the court.
If parties want to withhold documents, they still preserve them, so that the court can eventually make a decision about whether they have to be produced. As a former corporate attorney, Clinton must have known those rules. Her action prevented a neutral third party from ever learning what the emails she erased contained. She was, effectively, acting as the judge in her own case.
Lost in the detail of how the server was set up and messages classified is this fundamental, and undisputed point: Hillary Clinton destroyed possible evidence, on her judgment alone. Richard Nixon might have served out his presidency if he had burned the Watergate tapes. Instead, he held them, argued he did not have to turn them over, and lost. Hillary Clinton was a staff attorney on the Watergate Committee, and she has learned from that experience. Effectively, she has burned the tapes.