Hillary's Great Lie To Democratic Voters Will Be The Biggest Deceit in Election History

[berni_mccoy]

Last edited Fri Feb 26, 2016, 12:50 PM - Edit history (1)

By not releasing her transcripts, Hillary is essentially lying by omission about what she's said in private to Wall Street. If she is not held accountable for this, it will go down as one of the greatest deceits in the history of elections. That is probably why Bob Woodward has equated this to Watergate. Hillary won't release these transcripts because if she does, it will shatter the perception that she would represent the will of the people against the interest of the elite. By not releasing these transcripts she is fostering the greatest misconception of who and what she is about.

Voters should understand that she is not releasing the transcripts, not because she is being singled out, but because she is the only candidate who is running on a platform of being for the people when she's clearly for Wall Street. If she is allowed to continue forward in the primary without releasing these transcripts, the DNC is effectively participating in this deception and does not deserve the support of the people. That is the clear truth of this issue and why it is so very important.

[Cali_Democrat]

1. Do you think not releasing the transcripts is the same as or worse than Watergate? nt

[JonLeibowitz]

3. How can you say it's not without knowing what is in the transcripts?

[bjobotts]

98. Because one was breaking the law and the other is a legal campaign tactic.

[JonLeibowitz]

102. you seem pretty confident saying that, without any knowledge of what was spoken. n/t

[bjobotts]

105. Breaking into the Watergate Hotel vs the content of a speech? I'm confident

[merrily]

152. Did Nixon break into Watergate? Did he order the break in?

[passiveporcupine]

141. Oh, comeon, Jon Please

This cannot be compared to watergate. I mean... really...that is ridiculous!

[JonLeibowitz]

142. I didn't make the comparison, I said it is impossible to know either way without transparency.

That is kind of the point, in my view.

[merrily]

153. As of 1972, what had Nixon done with respect to Watergate?

This is not a rhetorical question. I don't know the timeline.

[WinkyDink]

181. It is too complex for this thread. There must be such a time-line on the Internets.

[merrily]

184. Pls. see Reply 154. I had looked at 2 before posting. They were vague. Thanks anyway.

[AgingAmerican]

161. The fallout of Watergate destroyed Nixon's presidency

The fallout of not releasing the transcripts could destroy Hillary's candidacy. That's how I see it.

[merrily]

151. Are you assuming Nixon ordered the break in?

[Docreed2003]

177. It wasn't a campaign tactic

That money went straight to her bank account. Illegal? No, and the Watergate comparison above is ridiculous. That being said, I have a real problem blindly trusting a politician who is saying "Trust me" without putting the proof in the pudding.

[Jackie Wilson Said]

106. Dear god do you know what Watergate was? Your comment is mind boggling if you do.

[JonLeibowitz]

110. I do. Hope that clears up your confusion.

[merrily]

154. I am at sea. I've looked at two sources so far and I still don't know.

I know some guys broke into a psychiatrist's office--Ellsberg's, I think. Was it ever established that Nixon knew about the break in before it happened? Or before he was re-elected?

[JonLeibowitz]

158. Uhhh you are confusing the Pentagon papers with Watergate

The Watergate breakin was about CRP (Committee to Reelect the President, pronounced "Creep", yes, they thought that was an acceptable pronunciation; of course, they did nominate and elect Agnew to VP so...) spying on the DNC's headquarters at the watergate hotel. Nobody knows why precisely they broke into the offices. It is known that Nixon was aware of and complicit in the ensuing cover up, I don't know that he was ever shown to be aware of the plans before the fact; naturally they would try to keep that from him for plausible deniability.

I would recommend you read the book by Woodward & Bernstein (two intrepid WaPo reporters who blew the cover off the scandal) and/or watch "All The President's Men" the 1976 Oscar winning film. The film is quite excellent with solid performances by Robert Redford and Dustin Hoffman -- directed by the great Alan Pakula.

[merrily]

160. Okay. I had the wrong office, which is my bad, but not material to your claim.

I am not going to read a book in time for this thread.

t is known that Nixon was aware of and complicit in the ensuing cover up.

Yes, I know that much. I asked what he had done before he was re-elected. People are talking crime. The break in was a crime, but Nixon didn't participate in the break in. Did he lie under oath before he was reelected? Even assuming he knew that CREP ordered the break in before he was re-elected, did he have a legal duty of any kind to come forward with the information? I am trying to figure out why people are implying he committed a crime before he was re-elected.

[JonLeibowitz]

164. merrily, I actually have made no claims in this thread.

I only pointed out that without the transcripts it is impossible to know if Hillary is as crooked as Nixon. She may be, or she may not be, but the Hillary supporters cannot defend her decision not to release transcripts and then promptly declare her blameless -- we really do not know if she is innocent.

Anyway, to your point, most of the crimes Nixon committed were related to the coverup of the coverup of the break-in, not the actual break-in. There was a cash slush fund used to pay hush money to the burglars. White house official Ehrlichman at least claimed that he was personally offered cash bribes by Nixon to remain quiet and obstruct justice.

The question of whether it was before an election or not doesn't really materially matter though, because the important thing is not whether he was corrupt or not. That's the comparison that is being made, not the specifics of the case.

[merrily]

165. AFAIK, though I could be wrong, failure to report a crime alone is not a crime.

Trying to bribe someone to lie to the authorities would be, though.

I know what you said, but posters are reacting as though you cursed out the Holy Spirit. I am trying to figure out if that is warranted because Nixon did commit a crime before re-election (no pun intended).

The question of whether it was before an election or not doesn't really materially matter though,

Yes, it is very important for purposes of this thread, which is all I care about right now. I am not re-opening the Watergate investigation. I am simply trying to figure out this thread.

Your headline is:


Hillary's Great Lie To Democratic Voters Will Be The Biggest Deceit in Election History

This is what the body of the OP says in part:

By not releasing her transcripts, Hillary is essentially lying by omission about what she's said in private to Wall Street. If she is not held accountable for this, it will go down as one of the greatest deceits in the history of elections.

If Nixon did not commit a crime prior to re-election, then a lot of the gasping posts on this thread about crime are mistaken. If he did not even know about the break in prior to re-election, then your OP is even more correct. So, for purposes of this thread and the reactions to your OP, timing is very important. If the only things he did wrong occurred after he was reelected, they really have nothing at all to do with elections, though much to do with history in general.

Anyway, maybe I'll look at more sources, even though I looked at two that purported to be timelines. Thanks.

[Bread and Circus]

13. As bad as...

[MariaThinks]

52. not even close. the sensationalism is disgusting

[upperatmos]

94. As disgusting as claiming to fight Wall Street while coddling them

behind the scenes?

[rhett o rick]

128. Actually the transcripts don't matter. There is nothing that can change the minds of those

that follow her. Some are going to worship the American Aristocracy no matter what they say, did or do.

Personally I see it as a moral issue. The greedy culture of Big Money corruption is directly related to the high poverty rate.

You do know that Goldman-Sachs isn't going to help those living in poverty.

Oh and congrats on getting the first response within a minute. Bonus points.

[AgingAmerican]

159. Not releasing the transcripts is not a crime

But the backlash against Hillary could be as devastating to Her campaign as Watergate was to Nixon.

[Fred Sanders]

2. "Not releasing the transcripts" is the new Bengazhi...the GOP baboons thank you.

[JTFrog]

9. Yep. And the GOP baboons are funding this attack.

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/republicans-offer-unsolicited-support-bernie-sanders

RNC chair Reince Priebus offered unsolicited support to Bernie

Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus was asked last week which Democratic presidential candidate he’d prefer to face in a general election. The RNC chief said Bernie Sanders is probably the tougher candidate.

It’s obviously difficult to take Priebus’ assessment at face value – even if he has a firm opinion, the Republican has no incentive to tell the truth – and his comments are all the more curious given what his party has been up to lately.

During Sunday’s Democratic debate, for example, reporters received emails from the candidates’ campaigns and their allies, but in a remarkable twist, the Republican National Committee also issued statements – two during the event, two after – defending Sanders against criticisms from Hillary Clinton and endorsing Sanders’ arguments.

Bloomberg Politics’ Sahil Kapur reported that Republican operatives have “a strange crush on Bernie Sanders,” and it goes beyond the RNC’s pro-Sanders rapid-response during Sunday night’s debates. After the debate, the Republican political action committee America Rising promoted the narrative that Sanders won the debate…. Meanwhile, American Crossroads, a group co-founded by Karl Rove, is airing an ad in Iowa bolstering a core tenet of Sanders’ case against Clinton: that she has received large sums of campaign contributions from Wall Street, and therefore can’t be trusted to crack down on big banks.

“Hillary rewarded Wall Street with a $700 billion bailout, then Wall Street made her a multi-millionaire,” a narrator in the ad says. “Does Iowa really want Wall Street in the White House?”
Yep, Karl Rove’s operation is not only complaining about the bailout his former boss signed into law, Team Rove is also suddenly worried about Wall Street’s influence in DC – just like Bernie Sanders.

[Fred Sanders]

15. The GOP has decided to stop doing Clinton propaganda research, since Bern fans do it for them.

[JTFrog]

16. Nope. They are spending big on this one. But they certainly are getting a lot of help. n/t

[FighttheFuture]

43. No, Hillary is doing this to herself. People who point out this are just following the money and

asking a very fair and relevant question. "Who do you really serve"? Hillary's dilemma is she has not yet figured out how to weasel her way out of it; she may not be able to.

You have to be obtuse to think that the GOP won't use this against her and that it is not ripe for the picking. "Bernie fans" have nothing to do with it, in the end. It is her pile her crap, she made it, she owns it.

[Shadowflash]

63. +1000

True Story.

[green917]

96. exactly!

Nobody gets paid $680,000 for a single 30 minute speech by a hedge fund without some quid pro quo and if they do, there should be no hesitation to divulge the contents of said speech (when the individual is running to be president of the united states on a platform of reigning in wall street). This is a shit sandwich of her own design and whether it's now (vs bernie) or later (against whichever knuckle dragger the gop put up), she's, eventually, going to have to eat it.

[Uncle Joe]

97. + 10,000

[Gorgatron]

99. Mic drop. +1001

[farleftlib]

100. Well put

Her excuses and dodges make it all the worse for her, and she has no one to blame but herself.

They must be hair-raisingly bad if she's going through all this stonewalling. Too bad for her.

[840high]

119. .^that

[SammyWinstonJack]

138. It is her pile of crap. She made it, she owns it. Yep she did/does.

[RoccoR5955]

48. I have inside information

that it is actually an organization called "Camp Weathervane" which is doing this.
They are a Third-Way, banking, pharma, prison, and chemical company funded organization.
I cannot give more information, because if I did, they would shoot me.

[Jackie Wilson Said]

108. I want to know what she said, but I dont want to destroy her in the process of

finding out, with Donald Trump or Ted Cruz looming outside the door waiting to take over power and destroy everything we hold dear.

[merrily]

156. If what you hold dear survived Reagan and Bush, it will survive Cruz.

Especially if Democrats actually fight back instead of voting with the other side, as many did with Bush, including Hillary.

[bjobotts]

111. Why is it 'propaganda research' to ask what she said in her speeches to Wall strt etc.

Why are you so disinterested in knowing what she said...so unwilling to truly know your candidate.

[yardwork]

174. You guys are killing me in this sub thread.

[retrowire]

57. lmao this logic makes me laugh

if the Republicans start caring about an issue that means its automatically taboo and we should all stop thinking that way! haha. heaven forbid they accept the science of climate change! you'd abandon ship then?

[Kall]

59. It's like you think

if Bernie refrains from mentioning Hillary's obvious problems, Republicans will too.

[bjobotts]

104. Asking Hillary to release her transcripts is not an attack

Not releasing the transcripts when asked by voters to do so makes her less than candid and makes it harder for me to trust her on the issue of Banking reforms and Wall street regulations.

[sufrommich]

12. +1000. nt

[Fawke Em]

25. Bullshit. I have a right to know what she said to Goldman Sachs

because it shows where her priorities lie: with the average person or with Wall Street.

But, the fact that she hasn't released them tells me just about all I need to know: she coddles them like puppies and doesn't plan to do squat about how they rip off the American public.

This has nothing to do the the "GOP baboons." Republicans don't care about that. Half of their base loves Wall Street. This is a purely liberal issue.

[TIME TO PANIC]

26. They should thank Hillary for not releasing them. n/t

[DiehardLiberal]

167. I am sure they will show their gratitude in due time.

[gcomeau]

31. Bull. Fucking. Shit.

When the big banks a candidate running for president promising to rein in their excesses have paid that candidate millions of dollars to speak to them in private it is a 100% legitimate public interest to know what that candidate said to them in exchange for that massive payoff.

And if you can't see that what the fuck are you even doing here?

[Marr]

76. Right?

It amazes what these sycophants will excuse. Here's a case of a candidate literally walking into Goldman Sachs, hanging out for a bit, and walking back out with millions of dollars. Repeatedly.

And they not only want you to believe that she's on our side against the big banks, they're indignant that you'd even want to know what she said to them.

It boggles the mind.

[merrily]

157. Does it really, though?

[sarge43]

171. Big banks pay a potential POTUS millions and not expect a return on those millions?

Now that's a herd of unicorns.

How did that go again? "If you've done nothing wrong, you have nothing to fear."

[artislife]

34. No.

She is telling us she is going to fight Wall Street after they have funded her lifestyle.


The fact that many h supporters are perfectly fine in not knowing what she was being paid for just underlines that it is a cult of personality.

[tecelote]

44. It has to do with integrity.

No one is helping the GOP by looking for the truth. Since when did that matter to the GOP?

Hillary can end this "smear" by simply releasing them. What harm could it do?

[kristopher]

67. The transcripts are a red herring to whitewash taking the money

So the same press that has shut out Bernie for 6 months now; the same campaign and media that set up these choreographed debates and town halls to promote Hillary and destroy Bernie, is now suddenly trying to play gotcha with Hillary?

Nope.

They are setting up the false premise that the transcripts owned by Hillary are not being released because those transcripts prove that she is engaged in nefarious behavior.

After all, almost no one trusts Hillary, right? How do you overcome that and the receipt of millions of dollars in direct payments to the candidate?

Isn't the corollary to this manufactured narrative one that, when the transcripts show nothing but a little clubbiness, it means she didn't do anything wrong?

"Of course she made money when she could" they will say.

"After all, who wouldn't, right?"

"We're all a little greedy, right?"

I mean think about it, what is supposed to be going on at these talks that could be harmful to Hillary?
Hillary's part of a rigged system, not an idiot.

This big deal being made about the transcripts is intended to direct attention away from the real issue - the money was paid to gain access. In fact, the very existence of the topic seems tailor made to clean up an otherwise disqualifying act by the candidate. Can you imagine any other candidate getting away with it?

The storyline being created by the Clinton campaign and the media, by design, diverts attention away from the fact that the money bought access to the presidential candidate.

Access is everything; paid access like this is legal corruption.

(CNN)Hillary Clinton and her husband, former President Bill Clinton, combined to earn more than $153 million in paid speeches from 2001 until Hillary Clinton launched her presidential campaign last spring, a CNN analysis shows.

In total, the two gave 729 speeches from February 2001 until May, receiving an average payday of $210,795 for each address. The two also reported at least $7.7 million for at least 39 speeches to big banks, including Goldman Sachs and UBS, with Hillary Clinton, the Democratic 2016 front-runner, collecting at least $1.8 million for at least eight speeches to big banks...

http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/05/politics/hillary-clinton-bill-clinton-paid-speeches/

Total Bill and Hillary Clinton speech income, Feb. 2001 thru May 2015:
TOTAL: AVERAGE: SPEECHES:
$153,669,691.00 $210,795.19 729
Total Bill Clinton speech income, Feb. 2001 thru May 2015:
TOTAL: AVERAGE: SPEECHES:
$132,021,691.00 $207,255.40 637
Total Hillary Clinton speech income, April 2013 thru March 2015:
TOTAL: AVERAGE: SPEECHES:
$21,648,000.00 $235,304.35 92

More at link above

Originally posted http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511272314

[Duval]

137. "Hillary is part of a rigged system" is true.

And I like your analysis of the transcripts. Thanks, kristopher. So, guess we're going to have to "suck it up" when she becomes the nominee. The media is not giving Bernie much of a chance. I am so disgusted.

[kristopher]

139. I believe Sanders is going to be the President.

And I'm certainly not going to change that belief at either the starting gate - or the first turn represented by Super Tuesday. The primary schedule is designed to kill the momentum of economic-liberal anti-establishment candidates but there isn't a word of truth to the claim that Super Tuesday is In Any Way Definitive.

Thank you for the kind words.

[Lizzie Poppet]

92. They'll be thanking the Hillary cabal in November.

When whatever clown car inhabitant prevails in their primaries destroys her in the GE...

[merrily]

155. No, it isn't, but keep trying to sell it that way.

[SHRED]

4. Woodward is a kook

This isn't Watergate. No way.

Having said that I am deeply troubled that she is not being transparent about her connections with Wall St.
The "poor me being singled out" routine is bullshit that I'm not buying.

[dchill]

5. I truly cannot believe that these facts don't strike every Democrat...

as patently obvious.

[bjobotts]

107. Makes me uncomfortable that she won't release them. The why implies they're unflatering.

[merrily]

162. Her refusal to release them is unflattering *and* suspicious,

so I am guessing the transcripts go beyond merely unflattering. I cannot imagine anything criminal is in them, but it has to be something worse than the suspicions her refusal to release is engendering. And "let the Republicans release them first, then I'll release mine--if I have them" is not allaying any suspicions at all.

[Chantel]

6. Agreed, she needs to release the transcripts

She must release the transcripts because she is asking to be the president. She must release the transcripts as an act of leadership and stop using the excuse that so must everyone else.

[LexVegas]

7. ...

[Bubzer]

65. That seems to be your standard reply. Nothing of subtence to say?

[CoffeeCat]

80. Haven't you heard? Fascism is funny!

Fascism is defined as the corporate control of the state. This is where we are.

Corporations pay the politicians. Politicians serve the corporations.

Wow! What a knee slapper!

Stop! My sides!! I can't breath!!

So damn funny when our democracy is pummeled into submission and "We The People" lose all power!

[libdem4life]

144. Saves the painful process of engaging the brain.

[Bubzer]

145. Is it bad that I want to laugh and shake my head in sorrow all at the same time?

[libdem4life]

146. Does boggle the mind...the one sentence Pronouncements of Truth.

[Bubzer]

147. Less boggling and more pure frustration, for me.

Guess I wont have to worry about it though, after Hilary brings us to heel...

[libdem4life]

148. She comes after my heel, I'll put it somewhere interesting.

Think martial arts.

[Bubzer]

149. LOL! That is definately an amusing thought :)

Thanks for that.

[merrily]

163. From my niece: Auntie, you have to be careful what you wish for because the wish fairy

has no return window."

[Jefferson23]

8. Expect to hear that transparency from our side is a Republican thing meme. LOL

Bernie really is making so many run for every cover they can find...amazing they
even know what a functioning democracy looks like..scary stuff.

[randome]

10. You don't have a right to know every single conversation a candidate has with other groups.

You don't. Clinton inartfully handled the issue when she should have simply said something like, "No, I'm sorry, private speeches are private."

Outside DU, this is a non-issue.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]A ton of bricks, a ton of feathers, it's still gonna hurt.[/center][/font][hr]

[islandmkl]

19. for now....eom

[drray23]

28. absolutely.

Besides, she was a private citizen when she gave these talks.

[Fawke Em]

30. "Outside DU, this is a non-issue."

Erm... no.

It's all over social media. I hear people talking about it.

The only thing that's inside DU is the bubble in which many here reside. They don't seem to recognize the American people are tired of this pay-to-play bullshit. Why do you think Trump is winning on the Republican side and Bernie's come from obscurity to challenge the "biggest front-runner in the history of politics?"

[randome]

37. Seriously, you think Trump's rise is related to issues of wealth and inequality?

Is he downplaying his connections with the corporate world? I don't see that the American people are tired enough of inequality to make this a revolution. Pinning our hopes on Sanders, whom most didn't even know existed 6 months ago, is futile since he's not likely to win the nomination.

Clinton, for all her flaws, will no doubt -IMO- surprise us, and Sanders and his supporters will be a factor is pushing her further to the left. It's not much of a 'revolution' if it's mostly taking place on social media.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]A ton of bricks, a ton of feathers, it's still gonna hurt.[/center][/font][hr]

[Dustlawyer]

33. When they heavily donate to her campaign, the Clinton Global Initiative, and her Super PACs, yes we

do! When they pay her and Bill over $100,000,000 for their personal fortune on top of everything else, yes we do! When she says that she is different than all other politicians that take the big campaign money in exchange for doing those Donor's will, because all of that money has NO EFFECT on her policies, yes we do!

It is not a "non-issue" outside of DU either, that's just total denial of the facts! Hillary's lack of trustworthiness and honesty is higher than everyone except maybe Trump, and I still think she has him beat on that too! The transcripts hold the key. She can either prove that what she is telling us is what she told them, or be exposed telling them she has their back while telling us that she will reform Wall Street.

It is the key issue of this Primary battle and her not releasing them pretty much tells us that she is guilty of either lying to us or to Wall Street. I think we can figure out which one she is lying to on our own, at least those of us who are not married to her as their candidate, ignoring anything negative.

[randome]

40. If Sanders wins the nomination, that's fine with me.

But it's not looking likely so we need to focus on how to push Clinton further to the left. Those who want to throw up their hands and give up if Sanders doesn't win don't really fit the definition of 'revolutionary', IMO.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]A ton of bricks, a ton of feathers, it's still gonna hurt.[/center][/font][hr]

[Politicalboi]

109. Are you serious?

Push her to the left. If she ain't there already, WHY are you supporting her? You can push all you want, the GOP is going to push her off the cliff with her own lies.

[randome]

173. I'm not so much supporting her as recognizing the writing on the wall.

To say that Sanders doesn't have a chance is not giving up on anything, it's simply recognizing that Sanders doesn't have a chance.

We have to work with what we get, not throw up our hands and walk away.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]TECT in the name of the Representative approves of this post.[/center][/font][hr]

[tabasco]

53. And we have every right to demand to know

Last time I checked, Clinton was running for office.

[Logical]

61. A huge group, yes we do! Nt

[gcomeau]

81. We do when those conversations were bought and paid for with millions of dollars.

Or are you on board with Citizens United now? Money is speech, and it doesn't influence people?

[Marr]

84. If she wants to be paid millions of dollars by Goldman Sachs and have private meetings with them,

she should be a Goldman Sachs executive.

If she wants to be the President, she should be transparent on this issue, yes.

[DhhD]

135. Could Goldman Sachs out her?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

11. Why the secrecy? Were her investors on Wall St. unhappy with her performances?

[tabasco]

54. That's the $64,000 question.

Why the secrecy?

[Laughing Mirror]

93. The $675,000 question

Inflation, you know.

[Surya Gayatri]

14. The figure of speech t-shirt...

[MaggieD]

24. LOL!

[pkdu]

46. Perfect! ( saving - thanks ) n/t

[Surya Gayatri]

56. You're welcome!

[alcibiades_mystery]

17. ROFL

Good Gawd.

[Logical]

62. She is a joke, i dont blame you for laughing. Nt

[alcibiades_mystery]

101. Pfffft

The sound of the Bernie Balloon.

[Stallion]

18. Geez! Hyperbole Much?

take a shower and cool off

"The Biggest Deceit in the History of the Worllllllddddd!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

[restorefreedom]

20. it will come out, the only question is when

and whether it comes through her or a leak.

i mean, who here actually does not believe that trump would be able to get a copy at any time (if he doesn't already have copies). he works in business. he has a lot of contacts. he has money.

he will get this and release it. if it comes out in a ge, its a landslide for trump over hillary instead of just a romp.

it would behoove her to get this out now and try and get control of the narrative. but it goes against their two primary goals

to get hillary as the first female nom for president
to keep bernie out of the white house

anyone who thinks this election, from the pov of tptb, is really about the country is, sadly, a sucker.

we are the chess pieces. the world is their board.

[tokenlib]

21. We know she didn't tell them the crooked should go to jail..

...and we know she didn't tell them they should buy stock in the pitchfork mfg companies..

[GummyBearz]

35. We know she told them to "cut it out"...

It would be good to know if she was winking at them as she said it though

[zappaman]

22. Ok.

[MaggieD]

23. Nobody except those that hate her care about the transcripts

Therefore there is no reason to release them. If she did some asshole would find three words they could take out of context to creat yet another fake smear. Very much like the 15 second videos, or the longer propaganda pieces they edit together.

What videos we do have of her speeches show that there is no there, there.

Now here's the bottom line - I'm happy for you to stay here wasting your time with things like this instead of helping Bernie get elected. But that's what it is. A waste of time.

[Bubzer]

75. I haven't seen anyone declare they hate hillary (anyone who's not a conservative).

She honestly just isn't worth that kind of investment of emotion. Plenty of people dislike her... or, in most cases, her tendency to flip flop, or grasp at political expediency.

There's plenty of facts out there showing she lacks integrity. Those who're not pretending these facts don't exist are absolutely justified is asking for more transparency. Particularly from someone who's trying to hide something. Politics has proven time and time again, whenever someone is trying to hide something, it's because they've done something wrong.

[MaggieD]

78. Check your sig line

That should clear things up for you.

And by the way, if people had sig lines like that against Bernie they would be hidden.

[morningfog]

79. There is no hate there, that's silly.

[Bubzer]

82. My sig line declares I hate hillary? Where does it say that... *looks again* nope...still not there.

Nothing in my sig line says I hate Hillary. As I said, she just isn't worth that kind of emotional energy. I certainly don't like her...and I sure as heck don't trust her... but then, you Hillary supporters like to conflate things like facts and dislike as being Hillary hate.

[MaggieD]

85. okay dokey

LOL!

[Bubzer]

87. Ahh... another non substence reply from a hillary supporter. I'm shocked. Shocked, I tell you...

see this...it's my shocked face

[MaggieD]

88. okay dokey

LOL!

[Feeling the Bern]

168. Your sig line screams "I support the other guy" In blind following of HRC supporters, that means you

hate her. . .and you're probably a sexist too for supporting the other guy too.

[Bubzer]

182. Oooooooh, also rich, white and angry! Oh, and not actually a liberal.

Probably a GOP or tea party operative. Or an extreme fringe liberal who just wants free stuff...
It seems like this list could go on forever.

[Politicalboi]

115. Hopefully if she releases them, Bernie will win

That's what she's afraid of. So she says ALL have to release. Another cowardly thing to do. The GOP aren't asking Trump for his transcripts. Do you think The Donald will release them to Hillary?

Many of her speeches show a lot of "there there" Sniper Fire comes to mind. Stupid lies just to lie. Pathological is what you call them, not President.

If she loses this for Bernie and takes us all down with her, damn right we're mad. And all for what, so she can finally be president, which she'll NEVER be.

[MaggieD]

117. Bernie is not going to win

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/march1dem.html

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/fl/florida_democratic_presidential_primary-3556.html

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/mi/michigan_democratic_presidential_primary-5224.html

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/sc/south_carolina_democratic_presidential_primary-4167.html

[Politicalboi]

120. He will when Hillary drops out

Or she can release her transcripts. More and more people are asking everyday. Is she just going to laugh it off or ignore this for as long as possible. Will it be too late for Bernie when she's exposed for the liar she is. And then people here want us to vote for her anyways. We tried to warn you. And now you warn us that we will create President Trump by not supporting her, when in reality, SHE created President Trump. If she knows this info will crush her, she needs to drop out or release the transcripts and ride the wave.

[MaggieD]

121. She's not dropping out

[Politicalboi]

122. Putting us all at risk

I like gambling, but not like this.

[MaggieD]

123. We aren't going to elect a socialist - sorry

I'm sorry you were ever under the illusion that would happen.

[Elmer S. E. Dump]

166. That's a bit asinine, don't you think?

You don't even know what socialism is, do you. It's people you you that are living an illusion you have helped create about Hillary Clinton. Illusions are sometimes interrupted at the most inconvenient times.

[Bleacher Creature]

125. The transcript thing is easily one of the dumbest "controversies" I've ever seen.

And I'm certainly not new to following politics.

BTW, haven't seen you on DU for a while. Did some of our friends here put you in a forced time out? If so, welcome back!!!

[MaggieD]

127. Yes, I was on a mandatory Hillary supporter time out - LOL

And yes, fricking stupid, which is why no one cares.

Thanks for the welcome back!

[BeanMusical]

132. "I was on a mandatory Hillary supporter time out"

Yes and no. It was more like a Schrödinger time out.

[Thespian2]

27. K & R!!!

Lying Liars just gotta' lie...

When pigs are able to fly, the 1%er will release her speeches to Wall Street...

[Skwmom]

29. The transcripts will prove or disprove nothing. The absence amounts of money and the unwillingness

to enact meaningful bank legislation says it all.

[xocet]

32. Mitt Romney had his 47% comment. Sec. Clinton might have a 99% comment in her transcripts....

If only she were for transparency, the voters could judge whether she actually supports the interests of all of US citizens and not primarily the interests of the bankers.

There is no inherent reason to trust her - she should realize that. Not releasing the transcripts makes her look like she is hiding something. Releasing the transcripts of her paid speeches would be a simple way to remove the appearance of impropriety.

[w4rma]

36. Hillary is completely unelectable and her supporters need to quit whining that she's being attacked

over legitimate things. I don't want a precedent set for Democrats to talk to Wall Streeters and tell them one thing while they lie to all the rest of us. Dump the Clintons, now! Before they hand the Whitehouse to a President Trump.

[WillyT]

38. HUGE K & R !!! - THANK YOU !!!

[Arizona Roadrunner]

39. We have standing to demand she releases said transcripts in total

Can Goldman-Sachs Tax deduct the $650.000 Paid Hillary Clinton for her "speeches"? If so, then it means we are subsidizing said "speeches" by having to pay more taxes to offset the taxes lost by said deduction. We could also lose services because they don't have the revenues due to said loss of revenue. Therefore, we have standing in asking for her to release the speeches so we can see what was generated for said tax deduction.

[randome]

55. I believe she was a private citizen when she made those speeches so, no, there is no 'standing'.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]A ton of bricks, a ton of feathers, it's still gonna hurt.[/center][/font][hr]

[TheSarcastinator]

68. Uh huh. You sure know how elections work, dontchya?

The idea that a presidential candidate's life before declaring themselves viable for the office is somehow "off limits" is one of the most ridiculous things I've read on DU, and that is saying a lot. Good luck with promoting that perspective: you're gonna need it.

[gcomeau]

86. And Romney was right to fight releasing his tax returns. Private citizen!

Wake the hell up and think about what you are saying.

[bjobotts]

113. When running for president you lose your right to privacy.Everything up for scrutiny, legally

[Arizona Roadrunner]

176. Yes, we do have standing

The issue isn't whether she was a private citizen or not. The issue is can Goldman Sachs tax deduct the payments to her. Therefore we have standing due to the tax deduct-ability aspect.

[Corey_Baker08]

41. Really? Even Bigger Than Bush's WMD Claim In The 2004 Election?

As a reason to invade Iraq?

Let's Not Get Overly Worked Up Over This Jesus Christ We Know She's Been Paid To Make Speeches SHE has acknowledged it so to sound the alarm and say this is the biggest scandal in political history is just an outrageous claim and sense it's not based on fact your post is a lie...

Why Can't You Make The Case For Sanders On His Record? Why Tear Hillary Down Instead Of Lifting Bernie Up?

[bbgrunt]

42. It is very telling that she hides these things from a public that

already doesn't find her trustworthy

[DCBob]

45. Good grief.. what utter nonsense. What do you expect is in there??

I'm sure its just the typical campaign donor crap virtually all candidates do.

[TheUndecider]

129. Not really sure what is in there, Bob, it's why I'd like to have a look

Her refusal to release makes me suspect there is SOMETHING in there

[DCBob]

130. I wouldn't turn them over either.

The Bernie campaign and GOP will take things out of context and exaggerate and create more fake scandals. She is doing the smart thing.

[TheUndecider]

136. You may be right, surely at least one sound bite to be misconstrued.

Or that's a rationalization to cover something untoward?

[Cassiopeia]

47. It goes towards character.

Clinton is campaigning on her ability and resolve to control dangerous banking techniques and reign in corruption. Releasing transcripts of her own speeches to these very organization should prove exactly that way of thinking if she truly believes in reform.

The fact that she refuses tells us those transcripts will do the opposite.

[Blue_Adept]

49. I love the smell of extreme hyperbole in the morning

It's also great to see the circular firing squad continuing on here at DU.

[trillion]

50. Which one?

I've counted many.

[MariaThinks]

51. i would think bush saying he was moderate was the worst?

[nadinbrzezinski]

58. Actually woodward's quote is not about the transcripts

but the email servers. He gets it... and I agree... and for somebody who worked in the Committee during watergate... she should know better.

Just a correction on what he means.

[George II]

60. So you're saying the fact that she hasn't released these transcripts (an issue that has never....

....been raised with any other candidate in history that I recall), she's lying about what she did or didn't say? And on top of this, it will be one of the greatest deceits in the history of elections?

Wow, I guess I must have slept through all of my American History and Civics classes.

[Jitter65]

69. Vietnam, NK, Iraq...I guess they weren't deceitful. nt

[NurseJackie]

64. ROLF!

[yourout]

66. Damn...I can only rec once. It should be a thousand.

Anyone that actually believes she is a progressive is a fool.

[brooklynite]

70. Why won't Hillary release her library records?

How do we know what kind of books she's read?

[TheSarcastinator]

72. ah yes, reduction to absurdity

Lemme know how that one works out for Team Wall Street.

[Jackie Wilson Said]

112. I believe it hinders the process if we make lite of the need to know what she said.

Maybe you travel in circles where it wont matter to you, due to your wealth, but for most of us it matters greatly.

I dont know you personally and I am not trying to be combative I am just stating a fact, if you are a wealthy person, you may find this issue less important.

For most people paying bills is a daily worry.

For most people not having rent for next month means you are 60-90 days away from being homeless.

I support Bernie but would gladly support Hillary Clinton were she the candidate, but please dont make lite of what this issue means to many of us.

[bjobotts]

114. She wasn't paid $200,000 to check out a book

[jcgoldie]

71. HYPERBOLE

Bernie Sanders supporters are the greatest exaggerators in human history!!!

[TheSarcastinator]

73. self-awareness is difficult and painful

Don't you think?

[Politicalboi]

118. And Hillary's one of the Greatest Liars in human history

Too bad for her the chickens are coming home to roost.

[90-percent]

74. How about a go-fund-me

If Goldmann-psychotic paid Hillary what, about $250,000 per speech, why don't a few thousand of us accumulate that amount in a gofundme campaign and purchase the transcript for the same amount GS gave her to give it?

Respectfully pay her the current going rate she charges for such things.

-90% Jimmy

[seaotter]

77. Too much

[Bleacher Creature]

83. The hyperbole on this site is getting out of control.

The irony is that with each of these diatribes against her, I become more convinced than ever that she's going to make a damn good President and a fine representative of the party.

[zentrum]

89. A little hyperbolic.

Not quite Watergate. But very deceitful and all this should have been vetted by the damn DNC and other "powers" in the Democratic Establishment before they put all their weight behind her.

Hoist on their own petard.

Wouldn't it be ironic if the Clinton Machine which created 3rd way and so hurt the Democratic Party from within, now brings down the Machine through their own arrogance and incompetency?

[anotherproletariat]

90. Wow...history is turning in its grave... n/t

[BlueMTexpat]

91. Whitewater, Benghazi, E-mails ...

no THERE there ... this is the same.

But do keep repeating the meme. All it does is show how desperately you are afflicted with CDS.

I won't see any response you make, so please spare yourself the bother.

[John Poet]

95. What Hillary probably said to Goldman-Sachs:

"don't worry about the things I say in public, that's just for the ignorant masses"

[kgnu_fan]

103. K&R

[great white snark]

116. Why should she give into the unreasonable demands of unreasonable people?

You've proven yourselves unable to make any kind of a fair assessment regarding Hillary.

[senz]

124. What is Hillary trying to hide?

[riversedge]

126. LOL. Your drama gets worse each passing day.

[Utopian Leftist]

131. I'm still waiting for her "47-percent" moment . . . .

Like when Romney was caught on tape calling 47-percent of Americans "moochers."

Surely among all the banksters out there who flock to hear her speak, one of them must have recorded such a comment from her.

That is the type of smoking-gun it will take to completely unravel her false image.

[BeanMusical]

133. Kick and R

[Trust Buster]

134. Transcripts....smancripts.

Her refusal to release private transcripts doesn't even approach the deception of traveling from college campus to college campus promising free college, a $15/hr minimum wage and Medicare for all to young voters knowing the whole time that a Republican controlled House will treat such promises as dead on arrival. Not releasing private transcripts isn't even in the same league with what Bernie is shamelessly doing IMO.

[Doitnow]

140. If all who write here are truly upset about Hillarty refusing to show her transcripts

why don't we all agree to stop reading and writing to the choir and instead start writing to our newspapers, write on our Facebook pages and all other social media we can think of how we feel about Hillary, maybe something constructive will happen. And ask who ever reads your opinion to do the same. It's easy to give up, hard to fight. If Bernie wins, he's going to ask us to REALLY work---it will just be the beginning. If you all give up now, what use would you be to Bernie if he does win!!!

[SoapBox]

143. The more she hides them...the more it means there is something there.

She cannot be up front and honest.

[kgnu_fan]

150. Kick before going to bed....

This is a beautiful song... so sharing it here....good night!

Song: "Big Ass Election Day"
Performers: Tom & Peter Sturdevant (Father & Son)
Songwriter: Tom Sturdevant

[CdnExtraNational]

169. According to the rules, Republican senators Rubio and Cruz can't do paid speeches either...

It's also unlikely that Trump did any either.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/tom-blumer/2016/02/24/press-mostly-accepts-hillary-clintons-bogus-speech-transcript

[Mbrow]

170. K&R

[raouldukelives]

172. The biggest obstacle to progressive change isn't the republicans.

We know they are bought and paid for. We know all they care about is money.

It's the ones who claim to be for it but are secretly against it. Who gush sweet smelling platitudes in public and then turn around and coddle the very individuals blocking any meaningful change.

[randome]

175. I'm sure she discussed Goldman Sach's secret plan to mow us all down like wheat.

Or, more likely, she said amorphous political stuff like 'international trade relations need to be improved...blah, blah, blah..."

But let's keep up the fantasy that Armageddon is fast approaching. Maybe we should all meet at the Malheur refuge next week and discuss how to fight back against the government.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]TECT in the name of the Representative approves of this post.[/center][/font][hr]

[Vogon_Glory]

178. Biggest Deceit? Excuse me? What Planet Were You Living On 16 Years Ago?

"Biggest deceit?" excuse me? What planet were you living on sixteen years ago?

Have you forgotten "I'm a uniter, not a divider"? Maybe you overlooked that same guy's claim that he could cut defense spending AND balance the budget? Have you forgotten He-Who-Is-Afraid-Of-Horses''s Potemkin ranch out by Crawford, Texas? Or the dead silence of what he planned to do in Iraq?

I seriously wonder about your lack of knowledge. Perhaps you were still being breast-fed back in 2000? Maybe engrossed watching The Rugrats?

Now that you are presumably of age, Babycakes, maybe it is time to school yourself in recent political history before throwing around the hyperbole.

I may not be happy with the Clinton's money-grubbing, but after the Right Wing's efforts to ruin them during Bill Clinton's terms in the White House, their behavior is entirely understandable.

[OhZone]

179. Then EVERYONE who gives speeches is too, huh?

I don't think I've seen too many proprietary private speeches being released by anyone.

Have you?

[sarge43]

185. Not EVERYONE is running for president

Get it, got it? Good.

[OhZone]

186. Oh so wrong. many of the candidates running have given speeches.

Oh so wrong. many of the candidates running have given speeches.

Just a couple of examples.

http://www.reviewjournal.com/business/money/which-presidential-candidate-earns-the-most-speech

[Sinan]

180. So what?

Vote for Bernie in the primaries, push Hillary to the left but when the dust settles, all of you better vote for the Democrat who wins regardless of the outcome or you are going to allow Trump to win and become POTUS. If that happens, you can kiss the Supreme Court goodbye for several decades because there will likely be another three open spots to fill in the next 8 years in addition to Scalia's open seat. That makes four picks to the winner of the general election. So, have a ball until the convention and then line up behind the winner, get the vote out and crush the GOP nominee. All the rest of the issues pale in comparison with the SCOTUS picks. Wake up people.

[PowerToThePeople]

183. Those conversations are above your pay grade, prole.

Now get in line and vote for more of the same.