Posted on 02/07/2016 11:52:27 AM PST by Kaslin
Vintage Hillary. As she fashions herself as a hardcore anti-Wall Street progressive in the midst of a surprisingly competitive Democratic primary, she's trying to explain away her six-figure speeches to major financial institutions, who also happen to be her generous campaign benefactors. At Thursday's (very low-rated) debate against Bernie Sanders, Hillary Clinton claimed that when she delivered these lucrative addresses, she spoke truth to power -- bravely warning about the subprime mortgage collapse prior to the 2008 financial crisis:
Hillary Clinton discusses her speeches on Wall Street
Given this alleged, evidence-free prescience, one might think that Mrs. Clinton would be eager to release video and transcripts of these speeches -- to showcase how right she was, and to highlight her fierce independence. When she was asked about producing these records prior to the debate, she laughed out loud:
Hillary Clinton Laughs When Asked if She Will Release Transcripts of Her Goldman Sachs Speeches
When MSNBC's moderators pressed her on the same question on the debate stage, she served up a quintessentially Clintonesque punt. She'd...look into it:
Hillary Clinton May Release Transcripts Of Speeches | Democratic Debate | MSNBC
Again, if she's the paragon of transparency that she claims to be (snicker), and if her Wall Street speeches were as prophetic and civic-minded as she says, her campaign should be turning them into ads. Instead, surprise:
In response to a question at Thursday night's debate, Hillary Clinton said she would "look into" the possibility of releasing transcripts of her paid remarks to banking, corporate and financial services companies like Goldman Sachs. But by Friday morning, it did not appear that much looking was underway. Joel Benenson, Mrs. Clinton's pollster, gave little indication at a Wall Street Journal breakfast with reporters that the transcripts would be forthcoming. "I don't think voters are interested in the transcripts of her speeches," he said. Whether they are made public is up to the Clinton campaign. Speaking contracts typically give the speaker the right to decide whether any material from a particular speech can be shared beyond the room. Goldman Sachs, for one, declined to make an on-the-record statement...Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, Mrs. Clinton's opponent for the Democratic presidential nomination, has accused Mrs. Clinton of being in the pocket of Wall Street and big business by noting that she has received major donations from them and was paid more than $600,000 in speaking fees from Goldman Sachs in one year. She has struggled to explain why she took that money, saying at a CNN forum on Wednesday night: "Well, I don't know. That's what they offered."
One problem with HRC's speaking fee explanation. It's not "what they offered." It's what she charged. pic.twitter.com/PrgJXP48wL— Nick Confessore (@nickconfessore) February 6, 2016
She is toast. And she will never release the transcripts. LOL
She probably doesn’t have the text of the speeches. After all, she wiped everything with a cloth.
She CAN’T release the transcripts, it would incriminate her, Bill, and Web’s daughter in a pay-to-play corruption scam.
Her not releasing them is the equivalent of taking the 5th.
For $600,000 she might release them. Plus interest.
There are no transcripts because there were no speeches...it was a basic BRIBE !!
I don’t understand what we are even discussing...speeches. Who in their right mind would want to listen to her screechy hectoring nastiness which makes a men’s testicles recede up to their necks, and makes most women taste aluminum.
Can you imagine? Having to sit through that...while you could be sucking down a martini instead?
Man that is one big pile of $$$$$$$$. I wonder if she has figured out to take it with her when she leaves this old dirtball.
That's a real interesting point. If there are no transcripts, no tapes, no photos, one can only assume one of two things (1) they didn't happen (2)not one person who was at any of her speeches has a record of it.
Is it criminal if your hypothesis is correct?
Because she has something to hide
George: You said you would look into releasing the transcipts. Will you release them?
Hillary: Well, if everyone else releases all their transcripts, if everyone is held to the same standard, and releases all of their records ... then ... I will look into it ... some more.
That’s quite a sum
If you get a chance get a look at a list of her speeches and fees. Mind blowing Corruption.
Never-Mind its posted. Like minds........
Absolutely.
Past TINEPUBLIC speaking events have included movers and shakers such as former U.S. president George W. Bush, former British prime minister Tony Blair, former Republican vice-presidential hopeful Sarah Palin, former California governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and television mogul Oprah Winfrey. The company has also worked with former U.S. presidents Bill Clinton and George H. W. Bush, His Holiness The Dalai Lama, Alan Greenspan, Paul Volcker, Donald Trump, Rudy Giuliani, Colin Powell, Lance Armstrong, Elton John, Tony Bennett and Diana Ross
Like Obama’s college transcripts, Democrats are allowed to hide damaging facts. She’ll get no pressure from the media.
exactly
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.