Will Hillary be indicted?

[Fusionmunster]

I'm a bit curious here. What on earth are supposedly informed people on this board basing these ridiculous ideas that Clinton has committed some high crime on? Her predecessors did exactly the same thing.

That's... not entirely accurate. Politifact rates it as Mostly False.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/mar/09/hillary-clinton/hillary-clinton-said-my-predecessors-did-same-thin/

Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice had private email addresses, yes. And they did conduct some official business over them. But they didn't have private servers, and they did use their state.gov address for most of their official email. Clinton never even activated hers.

I used to be in the "oh, it's all Republican BS" crowd, but then a (pro-Sanders, but non-fanatic - he'd vote Hillary over Trump, even now) friend pointed out  to me that Clinton never appointed an Inspector General the entire time she was Secretary of State. That didn't seem right, and I started trying to do more reading. (Doing that while avoiding BS from Republicans with Clinton derangement syndrome was difficult.)

The emails she exchanged with Sidney Blumenthal are problematic at best.

She held on to her private server and its data long after leaving office, including transferring its full contents to a hosting company with no security clearance or existing relationship with the government.  (And may have tried to get that company to delete its backups AFTER Congress asked for her emails....)

At least two of the emails on her server were flat-out Top Secret at the highest level, no ifs, ands, or buts, and they should never have been there. They are not the result of post-facto classification, or anything like it.

Lower-level staff have been prosecuted for similar but lesser things.

She's said a lot of specific things about the emails and her server, both under oath and otherwise, that do not appear to be true. (It looks to me like she really did delete official emails, for example.)

There's always a chance of a flat-out quid pro quo email that hasn't popped up yet. The email investigation may have already spilled over into investigating Clinton Foundation shadiness. And there may be a grand jury impaneled for this already.

In the end, at least to me, it doesn't look good. Past tar-baby and into ticking bomb territory. Clinton was, at best, doing a high-wire act on the far edge of what was legal, and my gut is that she didn't actually pull it off without some stumbles into lawbreaking.

The Republicans have certainly done Clinton a big favor by spending years blowing a giant storm of smoke without fire. (Imagine the result of the State Department's IG report if it had come out without years of Republican posturing?) In spite of that, I'm starting to think she's going to be in trouble, if she isn't already.

And by trouble, I mean either she's going to be indicted, or FBI Director Comey (and / or other senior FBI figures) resign in protest that she hasn't been, before leaking everything they have.

Your making some big assumptions there.

And people keep saying that low level staffers would have been prosecuted for much less than what Hillary did yet I havent seen anything of the sort.