As rumor has it, Trump to spend millions in the vetting of Hillary (and Bill) Clinton

Jonathan Swan / The Hill:15 minutes ago
GOP operatives on the prowl for secret Clinton transcripts  —  Republican operatives are scouring the country for transcripts, notes or secret recordings of Hillary Clinton  —  's paid speeches to Goldman Sachs in hopes of finding damaging material for the general election.
Editor's notes:  Trump maintains that Hillary has never been properly vetted by the media  . . . . . .   other than the obivous surface scandals.  And when I say "surface," I mean to imply that there is no exhaustive search for the underlying circumstances and reasons for each of her many scandals.  
The above lede is actually a part of this new opposition reality for the Clintons.  While Hillary is going to pretend to be "above the fray,"  we all know that the Democrat are the King Party of opposition research and mud slinging.  And when they can't come up with anything juicy enough,  they simply hire someone to make an accusation,  and, then,  report that as "rumor has it that   . . . .  "  In short order,  this becomes "fact," and away they go.  They manufactured the adultery story on Herman Cain and tried to do the same with Newt Gingrich and John McCain.  

Hillary has never been forced to accountability for her conduct with regards to those women Bill abused?  More importantly,  she has never been asked,  "Where were you the night those soldiers died in Benghazi?"  We already know Obama was asleep while the last two Navy Seals,  fighting for their lives,  not knowing that their commander had gone to bed five hours earlier., were killed.   Exactly what was her record as Secretary of State?  She served as Senator (New York).   Her legislative record, or, lack thereof,  has never been parsed.  Those Goldman Sachs speeches are bound to provide the kind of inconsistencies that bring an opponent down.  I mean,  there HAS to be a reason or four,   accounting for her refusal to publish those speeches.  And what about all that money laundering (hundreds of millions of dollars, or,  so goes the "rumor has it . . .")  via her charitable foundation,  foreign money received as donations but never tracked through the system?  How about all those 20 minute speeches for which she was paid an average of $230,000?  Exactly when did she become the kind of financial genius who could demand this level of payment?    I could go on,  but the reader gets the point. 
No one in the major media vetted Obama and McCain would not allow Palin to do so.  And no one has vetted Hillary.  

Well,  Hillary,  meet the Trump fact finding machine.