The people in the government that knew that the Clintons were doing this and turned a blind eye to their corruption. I don't know of another word for what this is.
Using her position at the state department to interfere with cases before the government in return for donations and speaking fees.
Plus the donations to the foundation in order to get Bill's connection to other country's government to officials so that they can get lucrative contracts.
Then there is the deal Boeing got to build jets for Russia after Hillary used her position to get it for them and Boeing then donated millions to the foundation.
The Saudi weapons deals and countless others and with each deal, Bill would first get paid to give a speech, Hillary would do her thing, and then the foundation would receive millions.
And what has the Clinton foundation done with those billions of donations?
Her supporters tell us that they spend the money on AIDS drugs in Africa.
Which has been debunked.
And is that all they supposedly have used the money for? Which other charities have received money from the foundation?
According to the charity navigator, none.
The money goes to travel expenses, hotels, their lifestyle and the salaries of the people who work for the foundation.
How much money was spent in Haiti after the earthquake?
I don't have the time to go over the scam they played on the Haiti people, but look up 'Clinton foundation Haiti scandals'
And people in our government knew about this, yet did nothing!

There was an article a few months ago stating that only about 5% of the 'donations' actually reach charitable efforts. All of the rest is spent on shmoozing, administrative costs, and fundraisers.

Why isn't anyone 'following the money' in that direction? What happens to the money once it is 'donated'? How much do the Clintons get paid as administrators (besides their 'speaking fees')?

The reason that I ask is because so many democrats (of which I am no longer a member of that org since #demexit) look at CGI as a noble enterprise. "They do so much good around the world." "They are saints." What would those 'good democrats' say if they found out the Clintons are spending that 'charity' money on islands or something?

It's one thing to squirm around some pay-to-play wink-wink everybody-does-it shenanigans. But how are the 'donations' actually being spent?

Maybe wikileaks can help us with that... lol

The State Department Was Open For Business.

Here's the Atlantic on UBS, how Hillary interfered with the IRS's case, and Bill subsequently got a big check.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/07/hillary-helps-a-bank...

when I figured that Nixon got away with the Watergate break in; after a few months the whole cover up started unraveling. The two main differences I see today are the investigative journalists have been shunted off to relative obscurity by the main media honchos and in 1972 there was a definitive difference between Democrats and Republicans. Today we get snippets of the pay to play Clinton Foundation that was going on during HRC's sos tenure but these stories are coming to us from "fringe" sources. In 1973 (especially after March, 1973) there were stories daily about Watergate and of course the Watergate Hearings were televised and replayed in the evenings. The Democrats in the Senate were hellbent on getting to the bottom of Watergate and the Republicans only reluctantly went along. After the break in and cover up were well established some of the Republicans (Sen Baker of TN comes to mind) worked behind the scenes to coerce Nixon to resign rather than go through a trial of impeachment.

One of my biggest problems with all this is the complicity of the Obama Administration in all this. Wasn't there an agreement to keep the CF separate from State? Why wasn't somebody put in charge of making sure that agreement was followed? Why did Obama's people turn a blind eye to the email server mess? The Senate, too, had a responsibility to make sure the agreement they made with HRC was complied with. Maybe this whole pay to play fiasco shows just how compromised our whole system is in every aspect of national governing.

American corporatists paid the Union costs of the Civil War in trade for title to the vast stretches of land along the routes chosen to build railroads. Despite several "panics" which happened afterward, the basic system continued unabated, until business owned the government by the 1920s. Then, their unrestrained excesses led to a complete collapse of the American economy.

Some of the more insightful capitalists sought to emulate Mussolini (Hitler hadn't come along yet) and desired to do to the US what Benito had done to Italy, only FDR messed that up. They tried to stage a coup in 1934, and essentially got away with it even though the benefits they sought didn't show up until FDR opened the war spigots in 1940. (FDR tapped a Major Eisenhower to be his liaison with these industrialists to get them on board with the nascent US war effort, which is when he learned about the military-industrial complex.)

The War Years were incredibly profitable, and few in Congress dared to do anything about the rampant profiteering. Senator Harry Truman was one such, going over the books of many of the war profiteers and threatening them with losing their contracts unless they got their costs more in order with what was expected. His reward was to be taken out of the Senate to be VEEP and not trouble the profiteers anymore.

No one since has come close to affecting the growing profits of the MIC.

Since government no longer can control the wealthy, the "charity" scam evolved for when war wasn't so profitable and lots of money was coming in. What the Clintons have done is to reverse the graft mechanism so that "charity" now funds war at the double expense of the tax payers. First, we lose the write-offs for charitable contributions, then we get to pay for the war materiel "donated" to warring parties.

when apparently it got zero traction, but clearly sounds pay to play. This is Abedin asking for help from Teneo before she started working for them:

Emails show Huma Abedin's ties to private consulting firm

A spring 2012 email to Hillary Clinton’s top State Department aide, Huma Abedin, asked for help winning a presidential appointment for a supporter of the Clinton Foundation, according to a chain obtained by POLITICO.

The messages illustrate the relationship between Clinton’s most trusted confidante and the private consulting company that asked for the favor, Teneo — a global firm that later hired Abedin. Abedin signed on with the company while she still held a State Department position, a dual employment that is now being examined by congressional investigators.