The difference between the Bakers and the Clintons is:
At least one of them served prison time.
Don’t think the Bakers had anyone whacked.
Jim had the affair, but I don’t recall him being accused of raping and/or assaulting multiple women for DECADES.
The Bakers only ran a “ministry”; no one was compelled to watch or join. The Clintons were in charge of all of us here in the USA.
The Bakers could not raise our taxes by force so they could misuse it. The Bakers could not aid terrorist enemies of ours. The Bakers could not have started any war.
When religious leaders go bad, it’s peanuts compared to our politicians. All people have to do is tune out and they go out of business.
They are nowhere near what corrupt politicians are.
So then you would agree on the matter of scale being the only difference?