If she deleted emails AFTER them being subpoenaed by Congress she would be in prison now.
Perhaps. That's a question for Congress, and the Republican Congress has chosen not to pursue it.
If she deleted work related emails after being subpoenaed by the FBI, as Comey confirmed she did, she would be in prison now.
Clinton claims that the deleted emails were personal, not work-related. The DoJ found that she had the legal right to withhold and delete personal emails. Whether the emails actually were personal, of course, we'll never know. But barring existence of some evidence that they weren't personal, there is no prosecutable offense here.
If she lied under oath to Congress, as confirmed by Comey, she would be in prison now.
Almost nobody goes to prison for lying under oath to Congress. Comey has done it, and didn't go to prison, for example.
Just because there is a different set of rules for her and she doesn't go to prison for committing crimes doesn't mean she didn't commit crimes.
I don't see any evidence that there is a different set of rules. There's a lot of evidence that she is given every benefit of the doubt within the rules, probably more than others would. I suspect that some of that is due to the influence of a Democratic administration, but I think most of it arises from the fact that no one wants to destroy a major party's candidate for president without extremely clear cause. It seems entirely appropriate to allow the voters to hold a referendum on these issues in November... and, frankly, if her opponent were anyone other than Donald Trump voters would destroy her for it.
I should mention that I do not like Hillary Clinton, at all. I'm a conservative-leaning libertarian who generally votes for Republican candidates, so I disagree ideologically with Clinton, and as a person I consider her to be a cold, grasping, schemer. But I dislike the post-factual era that US (and world) politics seems to be entering even more.