Among the extensive DNC emails exposed by WikiLeaks is one that implies yet another pay-to-play scheme. This one involves donors and their chances of landing lucrative positions allotted by White House officials. On April 20, Jordan Kaplan, the DNC National Finance Director, requested in a staff email: “[T]his is the last call for boards and commissions; if you have someone [in mind], send to [Finance Chief of Staff Scott] Comer — full name, city, state, email and phone number. Send as many as you want, just don’t know how many people will get to.” Six days later, a list of 23 prospects was transferred to Amanda D. Moose, the Special Assistant to the President for Presidential Personnel. Interestingly, not a single one of the possible recruits gave any financial contributions to the Sanders campaign.

The Daily Caller highlights a particularly suspicious finding: “One entry on one iteration of the DNC donor spreadsheet is telling as it suggests that one party donor expressed his desire to someone at the DNC about an appointment to the U.S. Postal Service’s board of governors. Next to the name of Democratic donor David Shapira is the acronym ‘USPS.’ The CEO of Giant Eagle, Inc., a supermarket chain, Shapira was nominated by Obama to the USPS board of governors last year. The pick was blocked by Congress, however.” The timing is purely coincidental, we’re sure.

Meanwhile, speaking of pay-to-play, the IRS is finally embarking on an investigation it should have begun long, long ago regarding the activities of the Clinton Foundation. IRS Director John Koskinen announced that his agency’s Exempt Organizations Examinations program would look into the foundation following a July 15 request from members of the House GOP.

As Jazz Shaw observes, “The timing of this next phase of the ongoing investigation into the affairs of the Clintons could hardly come at a worse time.” That’s for a number of reasons, not the least of which has to do with WikiLeaks’ pledge to reveal emails that, allegedly, incriminate the Clinton Foundation.

No wonder, The Wall Street Journal points out, Bill Clinton avoided the topic during his DNC address earlier this week: “No doubt the foundation does some charitable good, but this is incidental to its main purpose of promoting the Clinton political brand,” the editors deduce. “Since its creation in 1997, the nominal nonprofit has served as a shadow Super Pac, designed to keep the Clintons in the national headlines, cover their travel expenses, and keep their retinue employed between elections.” How appropriate it would be, then, if the Clintons’ so-called “charity,” created to foster their own ego and ambitions, is finally what brings them down.