(03-27-2019, 11:57 AM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote:

(03-27-2019, 11:55 AM)mikesez Wrote: Not really. 
Hillary maintained a big charity foundation.
People claimed, credibly, that she encouraged foreign states to donate to it, and that she got some personal benefit from these donations.
The substance of this accusation against Hillary, if true, is not different from how Trump is known to benefit from his business transactions with foreign leaders today.

I think the proven "pay to play" aspect of the Clinton Foundation is not an apples to apples comparison to anything the Trump Organization does.

I don't think they ever proved that Hillary or Bill were skimming anything off of money in the foundation.
They probably were. And it's definite that foreign dignitaries would have viewed the foundation as a pay-to-play setup. Set up a meeting to discuss your charitable donation and oh by the way bring up your official business during the meeting.

Meanwhile, Trump's kids openly collect the profits from his hotel and club operations. Saudis, qataris Chinese, and Taiwanese all suddenly become more interested in staying at or investing in Trump or Kushner properties. Just like it would have been with the Clinton foundation. Doesn't matter if the intent to have pay-to-play is there. From the foreigner's perspective, it looks like pay-to-play and will be played as such.

---