Hillary Clinton does not regret taking extravagant speaking fees

[restorefreedom]

this tone deafness in the midst of struggling families is one of the many things sinking this campaign



Clinton defends Goldman Sachs speaking fees


Democratic primary front-runner Hillary Clinton on Thursday said she does not regret taking extravagant speaking fees from Wall Street firms before she ran for president, arguing that she cannot be bought at any price.

.........

Clinton said there was nothing wrong with accepting the money, pointing to the diversity of organizations who solicited her for speeches.

“I have spoken to so many different groups,” she said.

....

Sanders, who has made income inequality one of the pillars of his upstart presidential campaign, has repeatedly hit Clinton over the issue.

“Goldman Sachs also provides very, very generous speaking fees to some unnamed candidates. Very generous,” the Vermont senator told voters in Carroll, Iowa, on Tuesday, according to the Register.

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/266693-clinton-wall-street-cant-buy-me

[juxtaposed]

1. The problem i have with this is I really do not care what hillary charged for giving a speech.

But she does not disclose the speech . If she feels bad about what she may have said, than I can understand why she does not want to release them..

[libdem4life]

5. Do you think they would pay Bernie, say , even half that much? Hint: There's a reason.

and those reasons are in 6 figures...and consummate in agreed upon results. Just like when you get a job. You care what you are paid...and what you have to do for it.

[juxtaposed]

8. we all know why she got and gets what she gets.. I would like to see what she said....

[libdem4life]

9. Yeah, well good luck with that. Remember Mitt's little embarrassment?

That cell phone at the server's station cost him the election...that 47% remark.

Not a snowball's chance in hell.

[juxtaposed]

10. F#@K Yeah!! So I'll assume you agree with what I stated above. F^&*K yeah!

[libdem4life]

11. I definitely agree with getting the speech...but it's not going to happen. We disagree

that one can get a 6 figure income with no expectations...really, really specific ones. I guarantee you my little vote makes little or no difference in this scenario. That's the definition of Oligarchy.

[juxtaposed]

12. holy crap shit dawns on someones friggen head..Not surprise at all.. You know what I mean.

I'd love to see the speeches!!

[Voice for Peace]

15. Making a formal request on behalf of primary voters

who want some reassurance would be smart I think.

[libdem4life]

19. Agree...just not going to happen.

[NorthCarolina]

2. She got MILLIONS...what's to regret?

eom

[nc4bo]

3. Of course she wouldn't. She is NOT even close to being one of us.

That's what's wrong with being so high up on the food chain. You forget what it's like to be a plankton.

[ejbr]

4. She cannot be bought,

but minimum bids start at $250k, thank you.

[CharlotteVale]

7. ROFL!

[JRLeft]

18. +1 ROFL!

[azmom]

6. The same Goldman Sachs that wanted to cut SS?

[link:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ethan-rome/goldman-sachs-ceo-lloyd-b_b_2199815.html|

[senz]

14. The same Goldman Sachs that would OWN her presidency

if the people are dumb enough to elect her.

[Punkingal]

13. Suppose she is telling the truth...if that's what she believes, she's too dumb to be POTUS.

[redstateblues]

16. jealousy is an ugly emotion

[restorefreedom]

17. who is jealous of whom? nt

[ucrdem]

20. Bernie shouldn't have gone there.

Inside a GOP oppo-research factory:

ORLANDO, Fla. — Inside an office park here, about a dozen women gathered to watch a 30-second television spot that opened with Hillary Rodham Clinton looking well-coiffed and aristocratic, toasting champagne with her tuxedoed husband, the former president, against a golden-hued backdrop.

The ad then cut to Mrs. Clinton describing being “dead broke” when she and her husband left the White House, before a narrator intoned that Mrs. Clinton makes more money in a single speech, about $300,000, than an average family earns in five years.

The message hit a nerve. “She’s out of touch,” said one of the women, who works as a laundry attendant.

“Her reality is just so different than mine,” murmured another, as operatives from American Crossroads, a Republican “super PAC,” watched closely from behind a one-way mirror.

In rooms like this one around the country, an expensive and sophisticated effort is underway to test and refine the most potent lines of attack against Mrs. Clinton, and, ultimately, to persuade Americans that she does not deserve their votes. While the general election is 16 months away, Republican groups are eager to begin building a powerful case against the woman they believe will be the Democratic nominee, and to infuse the public consciousness with those messages.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/12/us/the-best-way-to-vilify-clinton-gop-spends-heavily-to-test-it.html

[restorefreedom]

21. why not? he is trying to shut down corruption and the ownership

of candidates by big money corps. the fsct that a major dem candidate has a huge conflict of interest is absolutely a campaign issue for the voters.

if she doesn't like it, she can release the transcripts of what she said and we can judge for ourselves.

and crossroad is rove, not bernie.

[morningfog]

23. I'm really glad he did and hope he goes back to it again.

And I hope someone has taken secret video or can leaks transcript of what she says to them. I bet it would end her nomination chances.

[Ino]

22. Who believes her speeches...

are worth a Quarter Million Dollars? She's not getting paid for talking, but she has to "do" something for the money so it doesn't look like a bribe or payoff.