Story highlights Latest revelations make ethical issues surrounding the Clinton Foundation appear even more serious, writes Buck Sexton

An AP study found many of those who met with Clinton were donors; emails suggest some got special access, he writes

Buck Sexton is a political commentator for CNN and host of "The Buck Sexton Show" on TheBlaze. He was previously a CIA counterterrorism analyst. The opinions expressed in this commentary are his.

(CNN) There's the appearance of impropriety, and then there's the outright selling of government favors. Hillary Clinton's ties to the Clinton Foundation while secretary of state have always appeared dubious and unethical. Now, with the revelations by The Associated Press that suggest donors to the Clinton Foundation received special access, Clinton's defenders will have to address allegations that Madame Secretary was, in effect, selling her official time to the highest bidders.

With a quick glance at the numbers, any honest observer can recognize the depth and breadth of Clinton's pay to play scheme. Of the 154 people from private interests who met with or spoke on the phone with Clinton, 85 were also donors to her foundation . Their contributions totaled around $156 million. And this figure is entirely separate from the 16 foreign governments that passed along $170 million to the Clinton charity, all of whom likely expected favorable treatment for their interests from our nation's chief diplomat.

This not only looks improper, but under different political circumstances, and perhaps a different attorney general, a special prosecutor would be appointed to investigate. That the Obama administration set up guidelines for Clinton while she was secretary of state in no way relieves her of her obligations to uphold her oath of office, nor would any handshake agreement with the White House absolve her of federal laws concerning corruption. There is simply no excuse for her creating the appearance that access to one of the most important positions in the United States government was for sale.

The pro-Clinton chorus will no doubt claim that, as with the email server scandal, no criminal charges have been filed in regard to the Clinton Foundation, and so there is nothing to see here. But such a defense is both premature, and even if true, still undermines their preferred candidate.

We are still learning more about Clinton's dealings with the foundation as emails continue to trickle out (including 15,000 just recently discovered), under court order, from the State Department. And even if no charges are ever brought, the Clinton campaign has reached an ignominious low when Clinton has to breathe a sigh of relief not once but twice a summer as the hand of the Justice Department passes over her without indictment. "I'm not a crook" is hardly an inspiring slogan for the Clinton faithful.

Read More