As the saying goes, repeat a lie often enough...
The reality is that none of the three "sources" cited above provide any EVIDENCE of corruption. None. All three certainly put forth innuendo, but that's it. Read them closely - the Breitbart "article" alleges that, "'[Hillary's] staff — Cheryl Mills, Huma Abedin — were very involved in facilitating donors getting special access,' he said." Nice claim, but note that nowhere in the article is any EVIDENCE to support that claim.
As to Hotair.com (a fitting name), it states, "Make no mistake, many of the projects were financed through international aid organizations funded by various world governments led by the United States. And, as it turns out, many of the corporations receiving the largest amount of financial aid and incentive from these government-funded agencies were also big donors to the Clinton Foundation." First, there is no EVIDENCE in the "article" to support that claim (and again, what we are addressing here is the claim that these three "articles" provide further evidence of corruption in the Foundation). Second, assuming for the limited purposes of argument only that the claim is true, so what?
And finally, the "Washington Times". The substance of the "evidence" consists entirely of the following:
But the "article" lacks an important element - any EVIDENCE that Qatar (or any other entity named) actually obtained an audience with Bill Clinton from it's donation. And even if it did, Bill Clinton was not the Secretary of State - Hillary was.
So, again, no evidence. And, again, repeat a lie often enough...