The allegations against Hilary Clinton

Not being from the US, I’ve been coming across a bombardment of allegations against Hillary Clinton, many of which appear so serious that it just beggars belief that she is not in jail let alone was never investigated and there are just so many I cannot comprehend the scale and breadth.
But when I came across this video

listing “21 reasons why so many people hate Hilary Clinton”, I took the opportunity to list the allegations and try and make sense as to which are serious and compelling and which may be just Republican mischief making:

1. There is strong evidence she has some form of illness causing her to stumble, have spasms & uncontrolled movements. She is also described as forgetful by people working for her. There’s clearly some form of illness – at her age that is not unexpected, and the illness may not exclude her from office, but the US people ought to know about it and lying about having the illness does in my view exclude her from office.
2. Several people who have worked with her testify that she is cold and lacks empathy with other people – again not a crime – but from the viewpoint of those outside the US these are not the attributes we want in someone with their finger on the nuclear button who could blow up half the globe.
3. Email Liar – there is clear public testimony that she knowingly lied about her email server which had the emails deleted. When she knew it was criminal to do so. I don’t think there is any question she committed a crime in this instance.
4. She also had high security information on a very insecure server (so insecure the emails have found their way to wikileaks). As I understand it, not securing highly secret information like this is also illegal under US law.
5. I read somewhere from what I remember was a credible source, that when Wikileaks started to release emails Hilary asked to “drone” Julian Assange. This is illegal under US law and she would have known it. It also smacks of a trigger happy person who has no regard for law and order.
6. Bill Clinton raped four women – obviously that crime was committed by her husband and he is the one who should be investigated. Those  in themselves do not exclude her from office (except for the bad choice of having a rotten husband) – but the fact she threatened the rape victims to keep them silent does.
7. (This is new to me) Vince foster was “mysteriously suicided“, office plundered and files destroyed, then ended up with carpet follicles on him, placed by a river with the blood going upwards. I don’t know what links them to the Clintons … but it needs a proper investigation. And there are more allegations of murders: “A lot of it might not be true, but how many freak accidents associated with the Clintons and working against the Clintons can we have until someone starts to wonder … mysteriously chopped up in dumpsters“. I admit US politics is dirty – and perhaps allegations like this are commonplace. But I have to mention that the head of the Clinton Foundation (who presumably could testify against Clinton) has sought political asylum in Russia apparently in fear of his life. This suggests that people close to the Clintons know their life is at risk.
8. The Clinton foundation. There are whole videos just on the corruption. The most credible allegations involve payments to the foundation for contracts in Haiti and the the way very little money donated to Haiti through the foundation got to Haitians (as recounted by the ex president of Haiti). Another very specific allegation is the way Clinton’s brother ended up with a plush job in one of those given a lucrative contract.
9. Benghazi – she was responsible for an initial press release blaming a video and slow to acknowledge it was a terrorist attack “they [republicans] blame Clinton for being among those who misled the public ‘rather than tell the American people the truth and increase the risk of losing an election.'”. There does not appear to be a criminal act here.
10. George Soros (his name keeps coming up – but I do not know why)
11. Destabilising middle east then arming ISIS. (Sounds like it is difficult to pin on her personally)
12. Taking money from sexist Saudis and other dictators with appalling human rights and then falsely claiming to be fighting for women. This is important because she herself is making a huge thing about being a woman. She can’t support regimes that treat women like dirt and then claim to be on the side of women (unless she’s a sexist, racist Xenophobe).
13. Claims she is named after Sir Edmund Hilary who climbed Everest – even though she was born several years before the event. There appears to be an excuse about reading the name in a bee-keeping magazine. It doesn’t sound credible.
14. Lying about landing in Bosnia under fire “where the welcoming ceremony had to be moved inside because of sniper fire” – video shows her speaking to girls on the Tarmac. What makes this so poignant is the remarks were made in Waco (A place in US where there had been a massacre)
15. Election rigging – there is repeated allegations that electronic machines change Republican votes to Democrat. It’s not clear what involvement Hillary has nor what scale or change of result this caused. It is very concerning it can happen – and if there is evidence it is still happening – no matter the scale – then the election should be declared void and retaken in those states using electronic machines.

On the Email scandal, I searched for the Democrat “response” and found very little at all defending her action. Eventually I found a video so banal and obtuse in that it did not at all addressing the serious points that I searched again and found this (which compares the same video with another to show the blatant lies and serious criminal activity):

In particular, the statement that she used multiple devices is highly damning as is the fact that they intentionally wiped the system clean so that it was no possible to forensically recover the emails that had been deleted.
Given her consistent lies, it is almost certain she illegally wiped emails which would themselves have been evidence of criminal activity. Or to put it another way, she intentionally removed all the evidence she could have used to prove she was not a criminal fraud who should be in jail.