If it istrue, should she not be charged with High Treason?
Should, but shan’t. The Department of Just Us will see to that.
“If it is true, should she not be charged with High Treason?”
Yes, but I will settle for denying her the Presidency, and let the New Trump Justice Department investigate and punish her (and Obola too if the case can be made).
Because most Americans support her. America isn't what you think it is. It stopped being that long ago.
Both the Clinton’s AND Obama should have been charged with high treason long ago. So much so that it’s become quite a joke.
Absolutely.
That is why the entire Obama inside circle that was in charge of this gun-running operation through Benghazi to Al Qaeda (renamed ISIS because we are at war with Al Qaeda and sending arms to your enemy is High Treason) allowed those four Americans to be murdered.
The could not allow them to survive as witnesses.
Well probably because she didnt intend to sell them, it just sort of happened.’
“Should” should be “has been” but won’t be, except if Trump wins.
If I'm understanding all this correctly (and that's a big if), the underlying reason that Hillary wanted the back story of Benghazi to be held under a big lie of a videotape, is that Ambassador Stevens was a middleman of sorts in an arms running campaign into Syria, where arms from Libya (?) were funneled to precursor (to ISIS) rebel groups in Syria.
This might be stupid policy (or not), but I wouldn't think it would be treasonous.
(Her email server comes closer to that. Her deals with Russia re uranium are. Her husband's deals with China are. Other Clinton Foundation deals are. )
Somebody else can dissect and unwrap all this better than I can.