Bernie Sanders Doubles Down On Critique of Hillary Clinton's Speaking Fees

[Purveyor]

Source: ABC NEWS

During a one-on-one interview with ABC News today in Columbia, South Carolina, Bernie Sanders stood by and escalated his attacks on Hillary Clinton over her taking speaking fees from corporate banks.

The Vermont senator had just finished arguing he was “not into personal attacks and mean-spirited attacks.” When challenged about whether bringing up Clinton’s speaking fees at the debate constituted personal attacks, Sanders replied: “Well, I think it is a fact. A fact. Anyone disagree with me? She has received $600,000 in one year as speaking fees from Goldman Sachs. If that’s not true, I will apologize. It’s true.”

The past few weeks have been the most combative yet in the tightening Democratic race, and Sunday night’s NBC debate was no exception. Sanders and Clinton, now neck-and-neck in early voting states, tangled over health care policy, taxes and Wall Street reform. Sanders showed no hesitation to hit his opponent for being too cozy with the big banks, and today the progressive superstar said he was not nervous that the battle for the nomination was getting too negative. He stood by his campaign’s heated rhetoric.

“If you look at all that the Republican debate, I would think it was not very personal at all. I think what I have been trying to do, the point that I made last night, was I can’t walk down the street, as you all know, without media saying, you know, criticize Hillary Clinton, say something terrible about Hillary Clinton. It’s not my style of politics. What I have tried to do from day one is to run an issue-oriented campaign, and the reason to run is to show the differences of opinion -- you know, you have different opinions. Hillary Clinton and I have different opinions. It’s called democracy. But I’m not into personal attacks and mean-spirited attacks,” he said.


Read more: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/bernie-sanders-doubles-critique-hillary-clintons-speaking-fees/story?id=36364560

[Renew Deal]

1. That's one of them there substantive issues that puts food on people's tables.

[tabasco]

7. Indeed it is.

When national leaders are beholden to mega-banks, it is unlikely that food on the table will be a concern.

[cui bono]

10. Damn straight it is.

Shows she has to answer to those that gave her the funding. Doesn't look good for keeping a roof over people's heads and their tables. She'll be spending money bailing out the banksters again rather than the people. Hell, she even said she thought the foreclosures were the people's own fault.

That is certainly something that will make a difference in people's lives.

.

[tazkcmo]

28. As I said in another thread

They STILL don't get it.

[enid602]

67. BS

Maybe he's a bit jealous. I can't imagine anyone shelling out money to here BS speak.

[CharlotteVale]

2. Good. That $$$$ says exactly who she answers to.

[global1]

3. He Should Further Push Her And Put Her On The Defensive.....

and demand that she release transcripts of her speeches to Goldman Sachs or for that matter any Wall Street firm she's given speeches at for a fee.

Whether that demand comes from Bernie himself or from We the People it should put her in a very uncomfortable position trying to explain her way out - kind of a damned if you do - damned if you don't.

I'm really surprised that a request like this hasn't come up sooner. As a person considering her for the top job in this country - I want to know what she says to the Bankster's and the top 1%ers. Is she telling them anything different than she is telling us?

Don't you think even her avid supporters would want to know what she said?

[antigop]

5. He should also demand that she pledge NOT to put in Goldman Sachs alums. nt

[pangaia]

23. Why should he do that?

She's not going to win.

[Akicita]

8. Great point. She needsto release those transcripts.

[cui bono]

11. Yes! Good idea.

We need to see those transcripts.

.

[Kall]

19. It's just a source of curiosity

Some people wonder what kind of gifted speech maker Hillary Clinton is (which has been absent from public view) or what expertise on high finance she had to impart, that would justify an economic value of $300,000 per hour to Wall Street banks, since no influence changed hands.

[Voice for Peace]

12. Yes, agree.. Pass suggestion to campaign

It it a completely fair request. If refused looks very bad, too. Like Mitt's 47%

[cannabis_flower]

16. To be a fly on the wall...

or an undercover waiter.

[Ino]

17. Great idea!

I want to see what a Quarter Million Dollar Speech looks like.

[DirtyHippyBastard]

51. Fell asleep, and woke up in the middle of the night...

I think I saw some DVDs for a few payments of $59.99 plus shipping on the telly. I'm pretty sure it was her. Can't remember the phone number though.

[wordpix]

53. Was she speaking to GS when SOS?

Seems like a conflict of interest if GS has dealings abroad, which it does

[JDPriestly]

58. Yes. The speeches were probably video-taped. We should be given either access to the

videos or the transcripts of the speeches. Full disclosure.

I would like to know what Hillary was saying to the bankers that caused them to bring her back to speak again after the first banker-speech.

[Nihil]

59. I think you are overlooking something ...

> Don't you think even her avid supporters would want to know what she said?

Many of her most avid supporters were at those events ... they already know
the truth ...

[HomerRamone]

4. Do they really think her words of wisdom are worth that much?

Or are they buying SOMETHING ELSE?

[tecelote]

21. Well put.

If Hillary wins, watch her take a hard right turn.

It's what she's being paid to do.

Her recent lean left is pandering to make us think she works for us so she can get elected.

[Babel_17]

6. Most people seem to grasp the issue well, and agree that it's relevant

It's not like this is something the public hasn't noticed, or likely to be ignored by Republicans.

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/news-and-events/quinnipiac-university-poll/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=2311

And now this: http://www.quinnipiac.edu/news-and-events/quinnipiac-university-poll/search-releases/search-results/release-detail?ReleaseID=2314&What=&strArea=;&strTime=3

People trust Sanders, more than other politicians, to be honest.

[Odin2005]

9. He needs to keep up the attack!

GO BERNIE!

[malokvale77]

14. He needs to tell her to...

CUT IT OUT!

[CharlotteVale]

27. ...

[KittyWampus]

13. Maybe Sanders' age has him confused. Speaking fees are not political donations.

[malokvale77]

15. I gotta bridge... nt

[cannabis_flower]

18. Perhaps but..

If she doesn't get enough political donations she can always use her own money (that she got from Goldman Sacks) to do whatever she wants with it, including donating it to her own campaign.

[Cartoonist]

22. They're worse

Speaking fees go right into her pocket. Political donations can only be used for campaign expenses.

In any case, she gets both kinds. Bernie gets neither. He gives low cost speech fees to charity.

[pangaia]

24. Well, you are partly correct.

Some are........... and some aren't.

However your shitty comment on Sander's age reeks.

[Sam1]

26. If you believe that "speaking fees are not political donations" in this case then I have got a

bridge I'll sell you on a quite claim deed.

[guillaumeb]

29. Of course not. All of these firms expect absolutely nothing in return

for the money. They just appreciate a really good speech.

[anigbrowl]

42. This is in fact the going rate

If you had wanted to have Bush41 come speak when he was more healthy, it cost a couple hundred thou. That's standard for someone who's world-famous like that. Obama will earn about the same. Of course, most people know this; Sanders' attack is only impressive to people who don't know any better.

[global1]

61. Bush 41 & Ultimately Obama After He Leaves Office & Other Famous People I Can....

give a pass. But someone that is a current office holder or known to wind up being a candidate for the presidency smacks of being a payoff; a conflict of interest. And given what we know about these firms that are too big and getting bigger to fail - I don't trust them or those seeking an office to think either is doing this for We The People.

[guillaumeb]

65. But Reagan, and Bush, and Clinton all spoke after being President.

They were definitely exploiting the fact of having been President, but when a candidate for President makes so much money for so many speeches, questions arise as to where loyalties ultimately lie.

[wordpix]

55. Uh huh, that's right and shareholders love it when

their corporations pay ridiculously high fees for a nice speech in return.

[HassleCat]

31. Wonderful response!

Criticize Sanders with a comment on his age! Excellent! You have revealed much about the way you think.

[Bernin]

37. As if

Hillary is a spring chicken comparatively. Puhlease!

As Cartoonist said. Speaking fees are worse.
Personally, I'd pay her not to speak.

[coyote]

40. You forgot the sarcasm flag

Me thinks. LOL!

[ohnoyoudidnt]

44. She is clearly the Democrat they favor.

That tells me enough.

[wordpix]

54. Dream on, you don't give that kind of speaking fee and expect

nothing in return. Please.

[JackRiddler]

20. That is not personal, it's a political attack

and entirely justified.

[BadGimp]

25. Goldman did not give HRC $600,000 cause they like the sound of her voice

They expect something in return..

[UpInArms]

30. You Got to Dance with Them What Brung You

It's been five years since Molly Ivins's last book, which is probably too long a time in the opinion of her many fans. But the intervening years have given the bestselling author and syndicated columnist some of the best raw material a political writer could ask for. The Republicans staged a revolution, Clinton was reelected, welfare "deform" swept the country, and the militia movement came out of the bunker: in short, it's been a banner time for Molly's brand of shoot-from-the-hip commentary and uproarious anecdotes.

You Got to Dance with Them What Brung You brings together a first-class collection of smart, spirited, and fiercely funny writings. From the wild and woolly politics of her native Texas to the waffling in the Oval Office, Molly exposes the fatuous and hypocritical at all levels of public life. Whether she's writing about the 1996 presidential candidates ("Dole contributed perhaps the funniest line of the year with his immortal observation that tobacco is not addictive but that too much milk might be bad for us. The check from the dairy lobby must have been late that week&quot , conspiracy theorists ("Twenty-five years in the newspaper bidness have given me a fairly strong faith in the proposition that if you haven't read about it in The Daily Disappointment or seen it on the network news, it's probably not true&quot , or cultural trends ("I saw a restaurant in Seattle that specialized in latte and barbecue. Barbecue and latte. I came home immediately&quot , Molly takes on the issues of the day with her trademark good sense and inimitable wit.

"I can think of few causes more important than keeping free voices alive in a world of corporate media," Molly writes. She is one of those voices and a national treasure; as the Los Angeles Times put it, she is "H. L. Mencken without the cruelty, Will Rogers with an agenda." Whatever your political persuasion, you're bound to agree that Molly Ivins is one of the sharpest and most original commentators on the American scene today. - See more at: http://www.booknotes.org/Watch/102566-1/Molly+Ivins.aspx#sthash.nPfqQaEj.dpuf

[HassleCat]

32. I miss Molly

Another of her favorite sayings was given to her by someone commenting on the Texas Legislature, one of her most fertile fields for harvesting humorous anecdotes. This is from memory, so I may not have it exactly right, but it was some advice for those running for the legislature. "You got to be able to drink their whiskey, screw their women, take their money, then stand up on the floor of the legislature and vote against them." Of course, no politician is capable of doing that all the time, because, as Molly says, "You got to dance with them that brung you."

[UpInArms]

68. I always bought the Tuesday Fort Worth Star

just to read her columns

the world lost such an important voice

am so sad she left us

[6000eliot]

33. Oh look, a new line of attack by the Sanders people.

Ho hum.

[ohnoyoudidnt]

35. She was paid 600K from one of the banks responsible for the financial meltdown.

But nothing to see here. Let's move on.

[Bradical79]

36. I take it you aren't interested in discussing the issue? -nt

[6000eliot]

38. Not in the least.

[coyote]

41. Of course not

What possible conflict of interest could there be while talking tough on the bank industry and stuffing your back pocket with 600k. LOL!!!

I want to live in your fairyland.

[6000eliot]

66. The Bernie supporters care enough for all of us.

[Bradical79]

60. Shocking!

I understand though, it is pretty difficult to defend the indefensible.

[anigbrowl]

43. What issue? This is in fact pretty normal.

Famous people get outsize speaking fees, film at 11. Of course, a little research would have revealed that this is not unusual for world figures. I'm sure they're all in the controversy. Jimmy Carter charges similar amounts, up to $300k depending on who wants to book him. Naturally firms like banks etc. have to pay more than nonprofit groups. Gonna tell us how Jimmy Carter is also part of the corporate conspiracy?

http://www.celebritytalent.net/sampletalent/2753/president-jimmy-carter/

[ohnoyoudidnt]

47. There is a bit of a difference when you may be

in a very strong position to influence legislation for the entity you are accepting money from.

[anigbrowl]

48. I think you have it backwards

'with special guest Hillary Clinton!' is the status symbol you pay for. It's not often you get the chance to meet world leaders face to face. It's the sort of thing you use to attract people to your finance conference or whatever the event is. I worry about lobbying but not really about speaker fees, at all. Celebrities charge a lot of money to turn up on demand, not least to function as a filter on the thousands of requests they receive.

[ohnoyoudidnt]

49. I like to consider the source.

Last edited Wed Jan 20, 2016, 11:18 PM - Edit history (1)

If they thought she would be a threat to their bottom line, I doubt they would pay her 600k. If they thought she would attract people for them, then there may be more to it than her being famous. I suspect bankers like her for other reasons than just being well known. But that's just me. Given their history, I very skeptical of the actions and motives of big banks.

[Bradical79]

62. It's a little baffling that money given directly to an individual politician warrants less concern

I'm not sure I follow how direct payments to a politician's personal wealth is less concerning than lobbying activity or campaign contributions, though in Clinton's case she has a problem in that area as well.

[wordpix]

56. This is the problem with Hilary and you'd like to sweep it under the rug i suppose

But we know about these fees and the fact that puppets must dance to the puppetmasters tune. The Clintons didn't make it to the 1% rank with Bill's presidency and helping poor people around the world.

[Bradical79]

64. But what about other celebrities? How dare you attack Jimmy Carter! I don't want to talk about it!

Those are the best responses. That's how bad of an issue this is for us. It's frustrating the level of political corruption some of our fellow Democrats will desperately defend, but I guess there will always be a defense force for everything.

[Bradical79]

34. Well, it is a pretty clear example of our political corruption

It's an indefensible thing. I think it's perfectly valid to question a politician on where they are getting money from and how that might affect their decision making/policies.

[Indepatriot]

39. Sanders and his peeps should do this every day. It is factual, and therefore absolutely fair game.

All Day. Every Day.

[anigbrowl]

46. Please do. It shows how petty and uninformed his campaign supporters are.

Everything is a conspiracy to you guys, even though these speaking fees are actually pretty normal for someone so famous. Carter charges the same sort of fees and so will Obama after he retires. Well-informed adults already know this quite well.

[Indepatriot]

50. Rationalizations are really all you folks have. Good luck with that...

She's gonna get those Banksters to "Cut it out" right after they cut that check... and YOU"RE the "adult"....

[wordpix]

57. Just bc they do it doesn't make it right and she's a pres candidate

Carter got high fees after he was pres and never ran for office again. Any promises he made to donors weren't about his sway as a high ranking official

[global1]

63. Key Words - After He Retires....nt

[YOHABLO]

45. So she get's paid $600 thou by big banks for a speech: why should there be any quid pro quo?

Are those speeches available to the public? I'd love to read what $600 thou buys you. I'm sure she chastised everyone of them for being crooks and they belonged in federal prison.

[CBGLuthier]

52. The truly tragic thing is Chelsea had to "work" for a whole year to earn $600,000

But I am sure some day she too can cash an obscene check for a few hours work.