"If you ignore things like a clear pattern of private Foundation donors having access to her while she was Secretary of State."
I asked for proof of impropriety, not more innuendo.
"And the dozens of emails where people are making donations and tying it to an audience with one of the Clintons."
Common for the heads of charities to be expected to interact with their major donors, surely. Nothing illegal or unethical about it, not in and of itself. Likewise "one of the Clintons?" Which one and when? Surely that is important.
"And that the Clintons made $250 million without working paid by people who are also Foundation donors."
Via separate business dealings. Again, neither illegal nor unethical. And again, as common as can be.
"And the allegations of Clinton insider Douglas Band."
Which I have already noted prove nothing in and of themselves.
"Yeah no evidence at all"