This is well said, but I think you drastically over-state (over-estimate?) the "blindness" that exists among the Hillary "supporters". One can very reasonably believe Clinton is corrupt, while rejecting the constant stream of over-hyped and over-stated anti-Clinton hysteria from the right (IE: she's corrupt within the normal bounds (perhaps barely) of upper level Washington politicians and NOT the devil incarnate.) One can believe that Hillary is a poor choice for President, and perhaps should be DQ'd, while recognizing that Trump is several orders of magnitude WORSE, and therefore Hillary is the only reasonable/logical choice to make.
When one spends an inordinate amount of time denigrating the only alternative to Trump who has an actual CHANCE to win and prevent a Trump Presidency, these charges and discussions you suggest, however well-meaning or legitimate, do more to advance and legitimize the greater danger that is Trump. Perhaps many who appear on the surface to be denying Hillary's flaws and problems are doing so not so much because they refuse to see them or because they've made themselves blissfully unaware of them but instead because spending a lot of time contemplating them becomes counter-productive. Because even at their worst, if we gave Fox and friends credit for being mostly right (they aren't), SHE'S STILL A BETTER CHOICE THAN TRUMP!
This isn't a situation where we look at the candidate and say yeah or nay, only to await another candidate to consider, like the way the Senate is SUPPOSED to do with SC justices. We can only COMPARE the two candidates already presented and choose the better one. Deciding Hillary to be the better one should not be looked upon as deciding Hillary to be a particularly GOOD one. I think many supporters in here would have preferred a different choice from the Democrats.