The bailouts.
Which most economists agree were necessary.
Her husband repealed Glass Stiegel.
Which
Did not cause the financial crisis. None of the loan behaviours regarding housing that DID cause the crash were illegal under Glass Stegal. At most, it changed the dynamics of the crash, it didn't cause it
Was her husband (who is FAR more moderate), working with a Republican congress. How is this her corruption, exactly?
How many major bankers have been prosecuted and investigated in this country for the financial crisis?
She was a senator... not her job. Further... the issue was much of what they were doing WASN'T ILLEGAL. If it isn't illegal, you can't prosecute for it.
I understand she isn't responsible for all of these decisions
How very generous... agreeing not to hold someone accountable for something they didn't do.
she was a major part of the administrations that were responsible
She was first Lady, which is not an official part of the administration. Then she was a Senator, but nothing you listed was voted on by her. The She was Secretary of State... prosecutions were not her business.
could've spoken out on doing more
She might not pass sweeping legislative reform in favor of banks
So... she wouldn't do what one would expect a corrupt person to do?
but she's certainly not going to do much to stop it or do much to hold those on Wall Street responsible.
She's in favour of prosecutions where possible. She's also in favour of further regulation and has shown no indication that she wouldn't back that up.
She represents business as usual in politics.
She's one of the most liberal Democrats out there. Hardly business as usual
We need to take the money out of politics and Hillary isn't going to do that either.
She favours judicial nominees who will overturn Citizens United. Beyond that... most campaign finance reform would require full fledged constitutional amendments, which are a pipe dream.
So... again. No evidence of corruption and most of what you are saying on her stances is flat out untrue.