I wonder why the liberal blog you got this from didn't mention that another famous political figure who charges charities even more to speak.




I suppose Raw might excuse its one sided coverage by arguing that Bill isn't a candidate.

However, by law, any money Bill earns is counted as income for his wife, who is also a candidate for President. So there would an equally valid basis for his fees to come under scrutiny also.

Finally, there's the simple matter that these charities pay people like Guiliani and Clinton because the fees they charge are made up for by the money they bring in. So what's the harm for either?