Don’t be disingenuous. You said something dumb, you’re being called out on it.
You kind of blew it then, by adding in “Clinton’s corruption (which dwarfs Trump’s in my opinion)” because that’s not only fucking absurd, but it implies that the serious accusations of corruption against Clinton are valid - but they exist only in conspiracy theories. So you just utterly demolished your own initial point. Any potentially valid accusations against Clinton are so far below what Trump is not just accused of, but has admitted to (and multiple times over). Which all just goes to reinforce the point of the articles under discussion.
