Before the Convention, will CNN report that Clinton allegedly blackmailed Obama for cash?

Interesting question, fingers. It seems like the cash is part of the reason she's still around.
However, in the referenced question

http://www.hubdub.com/m7179/Will_Barack_Obama_pay_off_Hillary_Clintons_election_debts

the comments suggest that it is not uncommon for the opponent to help pay off some of the debt (at least through their donors or the party), so would that be considered blackmail?

It would only be considered blackmail if CNN reports it as such.

It would only be considered "alleged blackmail" if CNN reports it as such.

I mean no offence fingers but there are a couple of things I don't like.

I think it is in bad taste to post Ryans email, especially with no reference to the question he is talking about.
The private e-mails from administrators should not be used to reflect hubdub policy since the hubdub policy itself is posted on this web-site.

Secondly, I am glad to say that hubdub has increased the allowable characters of a question to more than 90 (100 last I checked) I hope that the question creators continue to utilize this space before resorting to the language of instant messaging.

Upon second look I see that fingers has provided a link to the voided question.
Sorry fingers, although I still think it is in bad taste. lol.
I think the starting odds of the original question were off. IMHO I think it very unlikely for Hillary to try to Extort money from Obama.

@mork - it wasn't an email from Ryan... it was his note in the public comments section of the voided question. The voided questions odds were higher due to multiple news sources instead of only one, and the likely hood that the alleged blackmail could be just someone's opinion so long as a news source considered it potentially credible enough to report it. This time only one news source so much less likely to happen. If Obama pays off her debts, there will be many claims/conspiracies that she blackmailed him, but CNN isn't likely to report any wacky-nut-job's rants on a blog. If, however, a politician or political activist or community leader (etc.) accuses her of blackmail (with or without calling for an investigation) there is always a chance that someone at CNN would decide to report someone's claims of blackmail, but they would of course call it alleged blackmail unless someone proved it to be true.

It's not terribly uncommon for news to report off the wall claims. One day on NPR they interviewed a person from the UN Security Counsel concerning her claims that the AIDS Virus was designed by white rich men to reduce the African population worldwide. NPR wouldn't give just ANYONE a chance to make those claims, but they decided her credible enough of a person to allow her to make her case.

Another wacky (but possible) example is this: <http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/herbschaffler/gGBTrn> and this <http://www.theconservativevoice.com/article/31889.html> I highly doubt that Hillary is using private detectives to dig up dirt on super delegates in order to blackmail them, and I highly doubt that CNN would report this, but if some activist or community leader claimed this to be the case, CNN just might report it as a possibility if the individual makes a halfway coherent case.

So, back to this question: There are already conspiracy theories parallel to what this question asks... for this to settle as YES, CNN needs to report it, but for CNN to report it there would either be evidence uncovered that suggests she blackmails him for cash, or a very public and respected individual accusing her of doing so.

...or maybe CNN goes off the deep end and switches to a tabloid format ;-)

I see what you're getting at fingers.

Although these transactions have been going on probably as long as politics has, I think the question is: Do 10 percent of us believe that the media (CNN in this case) will stoop so low as to report that any post-campaign assistance of Hillary from Obama is based on something sinister as opposed to just a somewhat routine political deal.

I think these contributions are normal when two contendors are from the same political party. The standards of mainstream media seems to be getting ever lower and stranger things have happened.

I feel you have a good market here fingers. And interesting too.

"post campaign" should not be in my previous post.

@ fingers:
do you mean off the deep end a little, or straight to hell like FOXNEWS?

Foxnews is frickin' EEEVIL!

Hillary Clinton in negotiations for Barack Obama to help pay off her debts
"One source close to a major donor said: “It’s not about the vice-presidency or any other position she might get. It’s about the money – in particular the Clinton family money.” The Obama campaign might have to reach deeply into its well-stocked coffers in order to secure the full support of Mrs Clinton and her husband Bill in the November general election."
(emphasis mine) http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/foreign/tobyharnden/june2008/cashtalks.htm

The first user posted comment on this article is particularily interesting:
"Pay to Play with someone elses money?
She stays in the race against overwhelming odds with her own money and now she wants someone else to foot the bill? Amazing.

So she is basically going to blackmail the party; she stays in the race unless the Democratic party pays her bills. Yes, it is all about the Clintons, their greed and selfishness." (Once again, emphasis mine)

Even if CNN found information showing this were true they wouldn't run the story. Pro Dem CNN.