LA Times: No evidence that Clinton has been corrupted by campaign contributions

Sanders calls Clinton's fundraising 'obscene,' but it's more nuanced -- influence isn't corruption

by Richard L. Hasen
April 25, 2016

Despite Bernie Sanders' repeated accusations, there's no real evidence that Hillary Clinton has been corrupted by large campaign contributions. But that's not to say donors haven't influenced her thinking and priorities. Lodged in the gap between Sanders' attacks and Clinton's rejoinders lies the truth about big money in politics.

Anyone who has heard two minutes of a Sanders stump speech knows he rails against a “corrupt campaign finance system” that benefits the rich and powerful, and boasts of the support he gets from millions of individuals making small donations.

Sanders and his supporters call Clinton's fundraising “obscene.” Using fuzzy math (such as counting all the donations bundled by lobbyists who have had oil companies as clients), the Sanders campaign asserted that Clinton took millions in donations from the fossil fuel industry.

More recently, the Sanders campaign's lawyer issued a letter suggesting, without evidentiary support, that Clinton or her supporters were breaking the law when they solicited six-figure donations in a joint fundraising operation with the Democratic National Committee and state political parties.

In fact, while that fundraising strategy might be troublesome, it does not appear to violate any of the many porous rules set by Congress, the Federal Election Commission, or the Supreme Court. Nor is there any evidence, despite the belief of some ardent Sanders supporters, that Clinton has somehow been bribed to do the bidding of big donors.

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-0425-hasen-money-in-politics-20160425-story.html
...........................

It's not nice to fib