Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
8 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

NanceGreggs

(27,813 posts)
2. Would you please enlighten us all ...
Wed Jun 1, 2016, 12:14 AM
Jun 2016

... as to how Hillary is obliged to disclose the details of a business transaction she was not a party to?

It's a question I've asked of the others who have posted OPs on this topic - and I've yet to get an answer.

Perhaps you are the one who can shed some light on this whole non-matter.

 

DemMomma4Sanders

(274 posts)
4. Why isn't she required....I mean I know criminals rarely willingly volunteer information but........
Wed Jun 1, 2016, 02:36 PM
Jun 2016
This time, the Democratic presidential front-runner is accused of giving special government access to an investor in a deep-sea mining company due to his ties to Clinton's son-in-law, hedge fund manager Marc Mezvinsky.

The group, the Foundation for Accountability and Civic Trust (FACT), filed a complaint with the U.S. Office of Government Ethics on Monday, alleging that Clinton "gave a private company special access to the State Department based upon the company's relationships with Secretary Clinton's family members and donors to the Clinton Foundation."

The complaint, first obtained by TIME, comes two weeks after one of Clinton's court-ordered email releases showed that she asked a senior State Department official to follow up on a special request from Mezvinsky, the husband of her daughter, Chelsea Clinton.

http://www.people.com/article/hillary-clinton-ethics-investigation-son-in-law-marc-mezvinksy-favor

NanceGreggs

(27,813 posts)
5. "A conservative watchdog group ...
Wed Jun 1, 2016, 07:37 PM
Jun 2016
... is calling for a new federal investigation into Hillary Clinton's actions during her time as secretary of state."

They can "call for" whatever they want to - it is meaningless.

In addition, the OP is about how "Hillary Won’t Say How Much Cash Her Son-in-Law GOT FROM GOLDMAN SACHS". I doubt she would know - she wasn't part of the transaction - and she has no authority to disclose the details of a business arrangement between two other parties.

BTW, this is OLD news - if you can even qualify it as "news" at all.
 

DemMomma4Sanders

(274 posts)
7. She used her position to get him capital
Thu Jun 2, 2016, 05:49 PM
Jun 2016

she voted to bail out this bank....its illegal beyond a dout.

Considering Hillaries connections w bug banks she should have recused herself from any bank related matters.

Lil Missy

(17,865 posts)
8. Got any proof it was illegal? Were there others who voted the same way?
Thu Jun 2, 2016, 06:00 PM
Jun 2016

You guys are getting so desperate.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Video & Multimedia»Hillary Won’t Say How Muc...