āI can tell you this, receiving funds in 2012 from Wall Street caused her to vote for them in 2004 on a vote she missed because her husband was sick. Not only am I bad with details, Iām a little fuzzy on timelines.ā
Well that was weak. I do love Bernie and love his passion and he is an authentic guy, but he is not going to get the nomination and as much as I like him, he canāt hold a candle to HRCās qualifications to be President. He is a one trick pony.
I saw some really interesting interviews with the man on the street over the weekend and what I was surprised to hear were the people who really like Bernie and his message, but they think HRC would be a better president. So it gives me hope there are thoughtful people out there
This guy is so not ready for Prime Time. Just go away, Bernie.
It is quite a leap isnāt it.
Bumper sticker Sanders stays true to form.
After a NY lossā¦Sanders needs to drop outā¦the focus should be preventing one of most dangerous
prospects to this country in yearsā¦ a possible Trump/Cruz presidencyā¦
RELEASING TRANSCRIPTS OF CLINTONāS SECRET SPEECHES TO WALL STREET WOULD COST HER THE ELECTION
Hereās a compilation of what those close to Clinton and/or the institutions that paid her obscene sums to chat with them are saying about those never-to-be-released speeches:
- Former Nebraska Governor and Senator Bob Kerrey (Clinton surrogate)
āMaking the transcripts of the Goldman speeches public would have been devastatingā¦[and] when the GOP gets done telling the Clinton Global Initiative fund-raising and expense story, Bernie supporters will wonder why he didnāt do the sameā¦[As for] the email story, itās not about emails. It is about [Hillary] wanting to avoid the reach of citizens using the Freedom of Information Act to find out what their government is doing, and then not telling the truth about why she did.ā
-
Goldman Sachs Employee #1 (present at one of the speeches)
ā[The speech] was pretty glowing about [Goldman Sachs]. Itās so far from what she sounds like as a candidate now. It was like a ārah-rahā speech. She sounded more like a Goldman Sachs managing director.ā -
Goldman Sachs Employee #2 (present at one of the speeches)
āIn this environment, [what she said to us at Goldman Sachs] could be made to look really bad.ā -
Goldman Sachs Executive or Client #1 (present at one of the speeches)
āMrs. Clinton didnāt single out bankers or any other group for causing the 2008 financial crisis. Instead, she effectively said, āWeāre all in this together, weāve got to find our way out of it together.āā -
Paraphrase of Several Attendeesā Accounts From The Wall Street Journal
āShe didnāt often talk about the financial crisis, but when she did, she almost always struck an amicable tone. In some cases, she thanked the audience for what they had done for the country. One attendee said the warmth with which Mrs. Clinton greeted guests bordered on āgushy.ā She spoke sympathetically about the financial industry.ā -
Goldman Sachs Employee #3 (present at one of the speeches)
āIt was like, āHereās someone who doesnāt want to vilify us but wants to get business back in the game. Like, maybe hereās someone who can lead us out of the wilderness.āā -
Paraphrase of Several Attendeesā Accounts From Politico
āClinton offered a message that the collected plutocrats found reassuring, declaring that the banker-bashing so popular within both political parties was unproductive and indeed foolish. Striking a soothing note on the global financial crisis, she told the audience, āWe all got into this mess together, and weāre all going to have to work together to get out of it.āā
Did we, though, āAll get into the mess togetherā?
Would middle-class voters considering voting for Hillary Clinton in New York on Tuesday take kindly to the idea that the Great Recession was equally their own and Goldman Sachsā fault? How would that play in the Bronx?
Lest anyone suspect that Clinton doesnāt release the transcripts because sheās not permitted to do so under a non-disclosure agreement, think again: Buzzfeed has confirmed that Clinton owns the rights to the transcripts, and notes, moreover, that according to industry insiders even if there were speeches to which Clinton did not hold the rights, no institution on Wall Street would allow themselves to be caught trying to block their release.
And Politico and The Wall Street Journal have reported exactly the same information about Clintonās ability to release these speech transcripts unilaterally.
The problem with the quotes above is not merely their content ā which suggests a presidential candidate not only āgushinglyā fond of Wall Street speculators but unwilling to admonish them even to the smallest degree ā but also that they reveal Clinton to have been dishonest about that content with American voters.
Last night in Brooklyn Mrs. Clinton said, āI did stand up to the banks. I did make it clear that their behavior would not be excused.ā
Yet not a single attendee at any of Mrs. Clintonās quarter-of-a-million-dollar speeches can recall her doing anything of the sort.
Release of the transcripts would therefore, it appears, have three immediate ā and possibly fatal ā consequences for Clintonās presidential campaign:
1.It would reveal that Clinton lied about the content of the speeches at a time when she suspected she would never have to release them, nor that their content would ever be known to voters.
2.It would reveal that the massive campaign and super-PAC contributions Clinton has received from Wall Street did indeed, as Sanders has alleged, influence her ability to get tough on Wall Street malfeasance either in Congress or behind closed doors.
3.It would reveal that Clintonās policy positions on ā for instance ā breaking up ātoo-big-to-failā banks are almost certainly insincere, as they have been trotted out merely for the purposes of a presidential campaign.
Yawn, she already won the Democratic primaries you know.
"But ā and whether that is a result of contributions from Wall Street or
elsewhere, you know, no one can say that, Dana,"
And, once again ā¦ I was invited there ā Once againā¦ I was invited there ā
Once againā¦ I was invited there ā Once againā¦ I was invited there ā Once againā¦ I was invited there ā Once againā¦ I was invited there ā Once againā¦ I was invited there ā
And you donāt care if sheās in bed with the bankers and wall streeters or not?
But - and whether that is a result of contributions from Wall Street or elsewhere, you know, no one can say that, Dana.
A lot of your supporters are saying exactly that, Senator.
Seriously, I went from loving this guy to hating him. He canāt go away fast enough. I would like to see his message and a few of his policies live on through Sherrod Brown, but Iāve had enough of that asshole to last a lifetime.
The Clintons are much better at giving non-answers.
This guyās got nothing!
A noun, a verb and Wall St!
So many words for a diatribe that is worthless. Just worthless.
Releasing the transcripts would just be another opening salvo for you to bitch and complain about. Thereās no āthereā there except for you people. In many ways, this foolishness reminds me of that Tucker Carlson waste of time when he claimed that he had some kind of video of then Sen. Obama that would supposedly change everything about the election in '12. Except, that same video had been released in '08 and he was still re elected.
Ugh, - and THESE are supposedly the kinds of people the Clinton campaign should be reaching out to?
Plucky, you took the words right out of my mouth!
I feel exactly the sameā¦the more I see himā¦the more I loath him!
A better president for whom? The working class or wall street bankers?
The more rope heās given, the more he hangs himself. He (and his campaign) refuses to understand that it just makes him look more like a fool.
Because by not vilifying them at some paid speaking event means she is owned by them?