There are many more examples yet to come.

When the press begins to dig into the Clinton Foundation, it will be revealed for the pay-to-play joke that it is.

Boeing gave The Clinton Foundation 900k, after Hillary personally spearheaded a multi-million dollar deal to sell fighter jets to Saudi Arabia.

Hillary Clinton may be vetted. But The Clinton Foundation has not.

It will be a bloodbath.

Say hello to President Trump. She'll be doing nothing but defending deal after deal after deal...and everyone will know that she is lying.

Ugh.

...that I wonder how so many Dems can continue to be so supportive of her. The potential scandals could ruin the Party's chances in 2016.

Almost all of them do. Almost. I will vote for her is she's the nominee, but not with any confidence that she can win, or with any confidence that she will help to make the lives of the 99% better.

Here:

http://www.newsweek.com/hillary-clinton-wins-union-endorsement-not-their-enthusiasm-398978

Is that the latest insult? The administrators other project.

Just stick in your fingers your ears and scream "LALAALALALAALALALA! I can't hear you"

I expect no less from Clinton supporters on this site.

There was an issue at hand?

Touché.

No helping you.

The whole group involved in this are a nest of Goldman-Sachs and Morgan Stanley vipers. Siklas and his "bud", Mezvinsky were Goldman-Sachs "buds" and the state dept. guy Clinton told to act on the request is now, courtesy of the old revolving door, a hot shot at Morgan Stanley. Siklas, then registered as a stockbroker at Goldman Sachs in New York, had contributed $2,000 to Hillary Clinton's 2008 unsuccessful presidential bid. The old quid pro quo comes pretty cheap, eh? Just $2,000 - why that's less than the $2700 all the "guests" at Bill and Hill's fundraisers have to each pony up for single photo taken with the it's-my-turn and I'm-a-woman candidate, or Bill.

And don't you just love all the respect shown to Mrs. Clinton & the office of SOS, when he refers to her as "Hillary"?

More from the OP link:

"Hey bud," Siklas wrote, telling Mezvinsky that Neptune was pursuing sea-floor massive sulfide (SMS) mining in the South Pacific and had just bought out two other mining firms. Siklas said that he and Adam needed "a contact in Hillary's office: someone my friend Josh (and I perhaps) can reach out via email or phone to discuss SMS mining and the current legal issues and regulations."

Federal ethics guidelines warn government employees to "not give preferential treatment to any private organization or individual," but there are no specific provisions prohibiting officials from considering requests prompted by relatives.

Clinton's willingness to intercede as a result of her son-in-law's involvement is the latest example of how the Clinton family's interests cut across intersecting spheres of influence in American politics, commerce and charity.

A lawyer for an environmental group opposing deep-sea mining said Clinton's action was "cause for concern that the State Department might take any action that could encourage such activity." Emily Jeffers, an attorney for the Center for Biological Diversity, a group opposing deep-sea mining, filed suit against Commerce Secretary Penny Pritzker and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration last May, accusing the agencies of failing to conduct comprehensive environmental tests before licensing Lockheed Martin Corp. to mine for minerals in U.S. territorial waters in the Pacific Ocean.

Sorry this news makes you uncomfortable. I'm sure the LBN hosts will figure out whats appropriate.

That seems to be the benchmark.

That should be the benchmark.

I understand that posters who want to praise their candidate or criticize another candidate do not want to be confined to GD-P (which is often an avoidable cesspool). They look for 'breaking news' (any 'breaking news') so they can post their praise/criticism outside of GD-P To bring the intra-party divisions to LBN may be fine according to the PTB, but I find it disappointing. Just my opinion. One I am sure that will change nothing on how LBN operates.

Because these revelations won't go away if she wins the Primary. It would only get worse.

I have no problem with bashing or praising Hillary or Bernie in GD-P. That what it was set up for. To bring that to LBN seems to defeat the purpose of the distinction between LBN and GD-P. Just my opinion - which will change nothing.

like those in GD:

Threads about the Democratic presidential primaries are not permitted and must be posted in the General Discussion: Primaries forum.

if you also object to BREAKING NEWS POLLS when Hillary Clinton is shown ahead in one poll or another. There's at least 3 or 4 a week in LBN.

is what GD-P was set up for.

I don't think most people come to LBN for news about our presidential primary but LBN rules allow it so I don't expect anything to change.

Recall how HRC claimed she only deleted emails which were personal, i.e, involved family, etc. Well this one involves her hedge-fund owning son-in-law, and his favor seeking buddy.

And there are thousands of those emails yet to be released over the coming months.

If we are going to see a change, the logical winning strategy is to vote for Sanders in the primary.

as President to protect Wall Street. She is a quid-pro-quo politician.

say hello to President Hillary Clinton!!!

And don't be so sure about her inevitable victory. She has a potential criminal problem. That means she is walking on very thin ice. Any minute, there could be a debacle.

live in in my "uh imagination"!

http://predictwise.com/

on the pulse of America, who can you trust?

this is from their Q & A

Q: What makes you think you are good at predicting things?
A: We don't. In fact, we don't think any individual is better at predicting things than a diverse crowd of people. Rather than try to be experts that attempt to do better than the "wisdom of crowds," we try to find and aggregate that crowd wisdom.

Basically, it's an aggregation of gambling and market data, with a little bit of polling aggregation thrown in. Much of it is based on the opinion of the sort of people who actually BET on these sort of things, which is hardly a well rounded sample.

Is Hillary in the lead by a good bit? I've seen nothing to lead me to believe that isn't true. Does she have a 90% chance of being president? I don't think even Microsoft Research scientists have any idea how accurate that might be.

Saying you trust them more than me isn't the same as saying their information can actually be trusted.

She has a 93% chance of beating Sanders!

Democrats have a 58% to Republicans 42% chance of winning the GE.

This is what happens when you are professional at statistics.

They aggregated statistics from (mostly) betting sites, which hasn't been demonstrated to be an accurate predictor of the outcome 8-11 months away from the actual decision. It is, at BEST a mildly educated guess.

If it makes you feel any better, I think Sanders has ZERO chance of winning the primary.

PredictWise is a research project which includes members of Microsoft Research, but should in no way be construed as representing the views or predictions of Microsoft or any of its entities.

and no....Sanders has a 6% chance of winning....Like I said....I will stick with the professionals.

Another day, another so-called "scandal". Haters gotta hate though; its really all they have at this point!

Most are made up, many are overblown, she always lands on her feet. Been a Bernie supporter for many years and believe he would be the best choice for president. Don't think the country is ready for what's best for them so we will settle for second best, go through more misery, income inequality, more monopolies, fewer jobs. Someday, Americans will smarten up and throw out the corporate puppets and elect a true progressive. I will support any Dem who wins the primary, doing less would be suicidal.

background on his company

When Mr. Mezvinsky and his partners began raising money in 2011 for a new hedge fund firm, Eaglevale Partners, a number of investors in the firm were longtime supporters of the Clintons, according to interviews and financial documents reviewed by The New York Times. Tens of millions of dollars raised by Eaglevale can be attributed to investors with some relationship or link to the Clintons.

I have been a registered Democrat for 26 years now.
Have voted straight party ticket every election but 1. And, that was for a commissioner's seat and the D was a known crook.
I will not vote for her.
My wife and mother and wife's mother are all very feminist, registered Democrats that have been that way they're entire lives.
They will not vote for her.

So, I'm really curious as to who her base is?