The argument that Hillary Clinton was bribed by contributors to the Clinton Foundation is absurd. Yes, several CEO’s donated to the foundation and this probably led to as many as 85 meetings over 4 years with the Secretary of State. But a meeting is not evidence of bribery. In our political system, politicians meet with donors. For example, I donated and met my congressman; that does not make me corrupt.
Furthermore, a donation to the Clinton Foundation is not a donation to Clinton. The Foundation, with an “A” rating from www.charitywatch.org/..., provides hundreds of millions of dollars for great causes such as Global Health (e.g, fighting AIDS), empowering girls and women around the world, combating malnutrition, planting trees in Malawi and more.
With Bill and Chelsea, Hillary expended considerable effort to raise hundreds of millions of dollars for charity work, and undoubtedly, Hillary would be impressed by large donations to their good cause, and would be appropriately willing to meet with them. It is absurd to claim that a meeting with donors is corrupt; such meetings are part of our political system.
Perhaps the most damning evidence of impropriety provided by the AP story bigstory.ap.org/...this week is the case of businessman Shwarzman; he and associates at his company donated millions of dollars to the Clinton Foundation, and then, the day after a breakfast meeting between Hillary, the State Department began working on a visa problem for him. Would you call this bribery? I think not.
The AP story emphasizes the point that a large fraction of her meetings and phone conversations (85 of 154 meetings) with private interests were with Foundation donors. Half of her meetings is a big percentage. But she was Secretary for 4 years; 85 meetings is less than two meetings or phone conversations per month. It is not scandalous for her to meet twice a month with various major donors to their charitable foundation. To suggest that Hillary would act against the best interests of the country to favor of a charity that does not directly benefit her financially is absurd, and, it has no basis in fact.
P.S. Thanks to diarist publius21 that inspired this diary.