Would you be interested in reading the speeches that Hillary gave to Goldman Sachs...

[TipTok]

... and do you think they will ever be released?

[cali]

1. Somewhat.

[GreatGazoo]

2. they will be released on the same day as Romney's tax returns

[jham123]

17. Who?

Romney?? Who is that and why is that a relevant issue?

oh, deflection, I get it

[GreatGazoo]

18. just saying they won't be released ever

nothing to "get"

sometimes a cigar is just a cigar

[HassleCat]

3. Not really

Just a bunch of stuff to make them feel good without promising anything specific.

[99th_Monkey]

4. Yes & No. nt

[NorthCarolina]

5. The ones that I would REALLY like to read will never be released.

Matthews was on a tirade about this last night post debate. It was quite amusing to watch him dance for the establishment.

[dogman]

9. He is the establishment.

Google Kathleen Matthews. He should be making a disclaimer.

[angel123]

15. Kathleen Matthews

Apparently, you have not watched him that often. He has repeatedly acknowledged that his wife is running for political office and I believe that she has endorsed Hillary. Let's just be honest here.

[dogman]

16. Every time he attacks her opponent he should be clear about this.

You are right, he is unwatchable. I am just asking him to be honest in every discussion.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

6. only in the sense of seeing what the capitalists were paying her for.

[bklyncowgirl]

7. I would like to know what was said.

I'm a Sanders supporter, so if there's anything questionable in there it would benefit my candidate. On the other hand if she really did tell them "Cut it out" as she says then that would help her as it would eliminate one of Sanders' best attack lines against her. Moreover, it is very possible that she will win the nomination in which case she will have to unite the party. Getting this out of the way, assuming that there's nothing bad in there, would help in that regard.

I want to like her.

[R B Garr]

8. I want to see Bernie name names of Wall Street execs

he would prosecute and what their crimes are. If it's such an important part of his stump speech, he should know who has done what and how. Make it an even swap. Make him walk the walk for a change.

[madokie]

10. I'd love to

there would be so much redacted that they'd be all but worthless though, is what I think.
But I'd still like to see what as much as she will allow us to read is

[madamesilverspurs]

11. But of course.

Nothing I like better than wasting my time pole vaulting over mouse turds.
.

[ladjf]

12. I don't it matters much what she said. The significant information pertains

to how she responds to being the recipient of such a inordinately large amount of money of her brief services.

No matter what she actually said or even what here benefactors actually said, it's what did the entire transaction silently imply if anything imply. If there was no quid pro quo expected by the payers, then they must have held Sec. Clinton in the highest of esteem as a public speaker because her payments were historical in size?

[Matariki]

13. My guess would be it's about investment opportunities

in the countries we've help devastate by war.

[senz]

25. If so, we need to know before we even think of electing her president.

[arcane1]

31. She's discussed that in public speeches already. "Business Opportunity" and all that n/t

[karynnj]

14. yes and yes, but they are almost certainly not going to be dynamite

But to put in context, I like CSPAN, like to watch Congressional hearing - and not just when they are for show trials. I read the WH and State department briefings when there are issues the media covers from the that I want the full response on. I know this is not typical.

However, the first question does not matter. There are people in the media and partisans who will read them. Either they will be a bore ... and close to what she speaks of in public ... or .. there will be things said that are at variance. Mitt Romney to the contrary, I am almost certain that they will be close to things see says in public.

Why? Her speechwriters would not have done elsewise. Not to mention, the speech itself is not why she is worth hundreds of thousands of dollars for a short speech. What they are buying is access - and for some lower level attendees, the illusion of access.

[Uncle Joe]

19. Yes and no.

Thanks for the thread, TipTok.

[Live and Learn]

20. Yes and no. I'd love to read those speeches but Hillary will do everything in her power to ensure

we can't.

[senz]

23. Which means she has something to hide from us.

[Live and Learn]

26. Of course she does. nt

[senz]

29. These things need to be made explicit

for lurkers and star-stuck Hill supporters.

[TipTok]

24. It certainly isn't in her interest...

1% chance there is a smoking gun in there...

98% chance that it is a bunch of filler that will just show that the money was for something else

Less than 1% that she went in there and gave them what for.

[casperthegm]

21. Yes, but if there is anything that would be remotely harmful....

Don't expect to get a look at that speech anytime soon.

[senz]

22. If she wants to be president, we have every right to know what she did in her previous job.

[Skwmom]

27. Only fake speeches would be released. nt

[senz]

28. You're probably right.

And if so, it's further proof that Hillary Clinton should not be allowed within a stone's throw of the White House.

[ElliotCarver]

30. No, because when I read her words I can hear her speak

and you know the speech will be meandering and bloviating and her sentences will just drag on and on but somebody's got to do it and there's no telling who will try and come to do it first but I was sure there and let me tell you I am always ready for a fight and I've got the scars to prove it