What law?

The Clinton campaign previously had indicated that her personal emails were deleted before Clinton received a congressional subpoena on March 4, 2015. But the FBI said her emails were deleted “between March 25-31, 2015” — three weeks after the subpoena.

That one? The first few lines of the link you provided? Just because they chose not to pursue doesn't mean it wasn't a violation of the law.

Just like a district attorney can chose not to prosecute on some charges in favor of only bringing a subset of them... or none at all?

It is illegal to purge/destroy evidence after being served a subpoena. However the answer seems to be that both you and the comment you responded to were wrong. A law was broken, but deemed unknowingly.

but the attempt to make the email thing criminal was in legal terms, bullshit

It was literally criminal...

From your own sourced:

Under 18 U.S.C.§ 2071, anyone who “willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, or destroys,” public records, or attempts to do so, has committed a felony. Those found guilty can be fined, imprisoned for three years, and “disqualified from holding any office under the United States.”

According to 18 U.S.C.§ 1924, it is a misdemeanor for government employees to “knowingly” remove classified information “without authority and with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location.” Former CIA director and retired general David Petraeus pleaded guilty to this crime after providing notebooks containing classified information to his biographer and mistress, Paula Broadwell. Petraeus was sentenced to just two years of probation and a $40,000 fine, but the maximum sentence is one year in prison and a $100,000 fine.

Her only defense was essentially "I'm sorry officer, I didn't know I couldn't do that".

The frequent use of the words willfully and knowingly may help explain why the Clinton campaign keeps emphasizing that she never intentionally sent or received classified information via email. “Courts have required prosecutors to show that a defendant knew they were violating the law,” said Cox. “Given that it is unclear whether the State Department may have approved of, or at least acquiesced in, Clinton’s email arrangement; given that there is thus far no evidence that Clinton destroyed, or intended to conceal, emails that were properly government documents; and given that she willingly handed over the emails when requested, pursuing this charge would seem highly unlikely.”

Which is why I said everyone involved needed charges if they broke laws.

People had to sign off on this. Even if Hillary, who wouldn't shut up about how experienced she is, didn't know it, the person who forwarded the emails about it knew. Hell, there's annual training literally every fed has to take on this.

I'm not saying it's the worse crime ever, I'm saying we need to hold politicians accountable. And if you're doing shit like this openly in front of the rest of your coworkers, it shows you think your above the rules, and that is very dangerous for politicians to think they are.

Hell, Biden got in trouble for not turning records in, he just left boxes in a random university office he just abandoned. Precedent matters, if no one is held accountable, everyone stops giving a fuck.

I don't know why it's such an unpopular opinion these days.

If you scroll down, someone else gave me a source and said it proved she didn't break in laws...

So I quoted the part of their source that says it was a felony and misdemeanor...

I don't know why people are acting like trumpets about this.

If a politicians breaks the law, they should be charged

Full stop