Hil: I need time to cut Bill charity

DESPITE A GROWING chorus of critics accusing her of pay-to-play, Hillary Clinton defended the work of her family’s charitable foundation Friday — asking for more time to untangle some programs to make sure future issues don’t arise.

“I’ve made it clear that if I’m successful in November, we’re going to be taking additional steps. But the fact is winding down some of these programs takes time. You don’t just turn on an off-and-on switch. Even trying to negotiate with partner groups takes a lot of serious effort,” Clinton said on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe.”

The Clinton Foundation has been an ongoing source of problems for her presidential campaign, with questions swirling about whether there was inappropriate contact between its staff and official Clinton State Department aides.

Recently released emails show top Clinton Foundation staffers asking for favors for top donors from government aides.

In response, the Clinton Foundation has moved to avoid future potential conflicts of interest should she become President.

Former President Bill Clinton has said he’ll step down from the foundation’s board and will stop fund-raising for the organization, though daughter Chelsea will remain involved.

The foundation will also stop accepting foreign and corporate donations to avoid future possible conflicts of interest.

But Clinton argued that finding new people and organizations who can carry on the work of the foundation can’t be done overnight.

She also highlighted the organization’s good work around the world, including helping 11 million people access more affordable AIDS treatment.

Clinton called the work “transformational” and “in line with American interests and values.”

She also swore that no new revelations will come from upcoming email releases that could damage her campaign.

Several polls show that questions swirling around the foundation — and her use of a private email server — have badly damaged her personal favorability numbers.

Nonetheless, Donald Trump’s feckless and undisciplined campaign has given her a clear lead just months before Election Day.

This is a storm whose “quids” in terms of donations are substantial but whose “quos” are generally trivial, and whose “pros” are invisible.