Hillary refuses to release her paid speeched to (for) the big banks

[wt1531]

When asked to release the transcripts of the speeches to see what she said to Goldman Sachs and other big banks behind closed doors, who paid her $225,00 per speech, she deflects the question by saying let the Republicans release theirs also. What kind of dishonest answer is that?? She knows there is so much embarassing stuff that could end her campaign in those speeches and that is why she is determined not to release them. She probably was telling them how great they were and if elected she would do anything to protect them despite what she is saying in public to pander to voters. If there was nothing that contradicts her campaign speeches in those transcripts, she would have released them long ago to say, "see there was nothing". Her dishonesty and arrogance is beyond belief and don't know how she could be considered as a good candidate in the general election. Big banks never invited Bernie for a paid speech b/c they knew he was for the common man. But they paid and invited Hillary because they knew whose side she stood on when all the chips are down. R E L E A S E the transcripts Hillary, and stop asking Republicans to do the same, b/c we don't care about the Republicans....Democrats want to know what you said to the banks behind closed doors who paid you $225,000.00 per speech.

[revbones]

1. You said "Democrats want to know "

I think you'll be hard-pressed to find a Hillary supporter that does. They are innoculated to the truth of anything negative about her.

[iemitsu]

2. I'm a Democrat and I want to know.

[kristopher]

45. Do you want them for all $21,000,000 worth of speeches, or just...

...a selected (by her) sample?

[iemitsu]

67. I want full disclosure.

We can't have people in charge of our system who speak out of both sides of their mouths.

[wt1531]

3. I meant Democrats who really want to vet their candidates before November

Blind supporters of any candidate are just that...blind to any fault of their candidate.

[JackRiddler]

54. Democrats, Schmemocrats.

The American people have every right to know who this prospective president is and what she did, whether or not all of them care. She's can fool most of the people some of the time, but that does not make this kind of behavior legitimate.

[metroins]

4. Name one positive way this can help her.

If her speech says nothing, they'll criticize her for charging 200k+ for a nothing speech.

It's not like people will say "Oh, what a great speech"

This is literally a non issue. I do speaking for a living and in my transcripts you could pick any small sentence and blow it out of context. Then you're on the defensive over NOTHING. I told one guy the average income for his position was $35k but at his company he'd likely make 50k. His boss then came at me saying "Why did you tell X he'll only make 35k?" I showed him the video and then he said "Why only 50k?"

Just like people are doing to Bernies old taped statements.

Releasing them would be a stupid idea, she couldn't win even if the speech was about unicorns & rainbows.

[AgingAmerican]

5. She is hiding something

So she won't release them.

[metroins]

7. What is your SSN?

DOB, address, college transcripts and medical history.

If you don't release them now, you are hiding something.

Obviously I'm joking and don't want you to post it. But it's the same thing as Obamas College Transcripts. Nothing positive is gained by releasing this stuff.

You can spin anything in any direction.

[AgingAmerican]

8. She is hiding something

Assurances, most likely.

I am not running for president, BTW. She is.

[metroins]

10. I'm not buying it

When you release the data I requested, I'm going to assume you are hiding something as well.

[Gwhittey]

13. "I'm not buying it"

No no really he is not running for President. I am pretty sure of that.

[metroins]

15. I don't know the posters real name

They could be running. Who knows?

We won't know until they release the information.

See....these are RW tactics.

[madokie]

46. Said by a true Hillary supporter

The tracks one leaves by where they travel can be very telling

[Old Crow]

47. Yours is a very weak argument.

A central point in Hillary's campaigning has been her assertion that she told Wall Street to "CUT IT OUT!" That's an odd claim, coming as it does from someone who has been accepting millions of dollars in donations and ludicrously large speaking fees in the hundreds of thousands of dollars from Wall Street. It's a given under such circumstances that the public would want to see if, in her speeches, she was taking as tough a line with financial industry executives as she is now claiming.

The role of Wall Street in our economy is a very important issue to voters. Respecting the importance of the issue, Hillary ought to release the transcipts.

She knows this. We know this. Chances are, you know this.

But it will never happen. If those speeches weren't filled with embarrassing pandering to Goldman Sachs executives, Hillary would have released them already. She has absolutely no intention of ever releasing them.

The role of Wikileaks, in the coming months, however, is another matter.

[metroins]

48. Name how it would help

Even if squeaky clean. People would take them out of context.

She cannot win on the transcript front, so it's smarter to not release them.

[bvar22]

69. It is worse if she continues to hide them.

Then all we have is speculation about what was said.
When she stonewalls, it validates the speculation.


I believe she blamed Low Income Borrowers (code for PoC) for the Banking Crisis,
and that is more than likely.
And YES, that will hurt her, especially with her "firewall"".

[AgingAmerican]

14. Of course you aren't

Because you don't want them released either.

You don't buy that I'm not running for president? Um....ok!

[metroins]

17. I don't care if they're released

I'm being realistic.

And I don't know if you're running or not until you release the information and prove me wrong.

It's a joke.

[AgingAmerican]

18. Yes you do

And you don't hide it well.

I'm not running for public office, but if I ever do I will release all my speeches to big banks and investment houses.

[metroins]

22. Aging American

Sounds like a ghost name for Bernard Sanders.

Are you Bernie?

I think we've both made our points, continuing on seems fruitless.

[840high]

28. He really is not running

for president.

[metroins]

31. I don't know that

I have no idea who that poster is.

Could be Bernie for all I know.

I'm again being facetious.

[libdem4life]

40. What a crock. Sounds like a spoiled child.

[metroins]

41. Exactly

Trying to accuse a person based on not releasing information does sound that way.

[Arazi]

43. Has any presidential candidate released their SSN?

[metroins]

44. Point must have

Gone over your head.

I'm asking him to prove something and treating him as guilty until he proves otherwise.

It's a smear tactic, because if the poster releases the information, I'll ask for more. Then I'll dig into their family, then every college/high school paper/online dating profile they ever met. The digging and smears never stop.

My dad taught me "When you can't please somebody, you're better off not trying and move onto important matters".

I was using it as an example.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

65. +1

People should probably be asking for her birth certificate too. I mean, she could be hiding something.

[wt1531]

6. It will help Democratic voters

It is not about her. Voters should take a look at it and decide if she is fit to be their nominee. It should not be about helping Hillary.....she is not important compared to what is at stake in November..it should be about helping voters decide who is best fit to be their President. If there is something in the speeches that will make her nomination a fatal mistake for Democrats, voters are entitled to know it now, before it is too late. You are right, if this is about Hillary and just helping Hillary, yeah don't release it. But if she had the voter's best interest at heart (which I doubt the has), then she should release it and let the chips fall where they may. Not releasing it actually opens her up to all kinds of accusations and suspicions.

[metroins]

9. I'd like Bernie

To release every house he's done carpentry on so I can inspect the work.

Not really.

The woman did a lot of speeches. Releasing them is not going to help anybody because the only people reading them will be looking for out of context dirt.

[Juicy_Bellows]

16. If Bernie got 225k for an hours worth of carpentry, I'd like to take a look as well.

Apples and rutabagas...

[metroins]

19. He worked on properties

That hold up structures that people inhabit.

An incorrect installation could cause millions in bodily injury. I want to protect the people of the USA from possible shoddy work that could kill them and their children.

I'm being facetious, but you can spin anything into sounding like it's serious.

[Juicy_Bellows]

26. Fair enough -

but I don't think the best engineers and carpenters in the world command 225k for an hour or two of work.

I'll concede releasing the transcripts now, no matter how benevolent, won't help her. However, if they were truly benevolent in nature, releasing them right after it came up could have scored points.

I feel there is a good reason why she didn't do that - however speculative that is on my part.

[metroins]

29. Fair enough

Thank you for being reasonable and rational.

[Juicy_Bellows]

34. Same to you - civil discourse is the best discourse!

[revbones]

11. So you're not interested in transparency because it won't help her?

That speaks to the mentality of Hillary supporters.

The problem is that she is saying she'll regulate Wall St. But she gave speeches and received millions from Wall St. Are we supposed to believe that they just gave her money because she's so tough on them?

[metroins]

21. I'm interested in things that matter

She got paid for speeches.

We should be arguing policy differences, not how the speech circuit works.

Stuff that matters..

[revbones]

23. Stuff that matters should include

Honesty, integrity and the truth.

Policy positions don't matter at all if the one supposedly holding that position is not being truthful.

In this case, not releasing them makes it appear as though Hilary is not being truthful when she takes millions from Wall St for speeches but tells us that she will stand up to Wall St for the people.

If she won't tell us what she said, how can we believe her? It is truly a shame that Hillary supporters do not see this.

[metroins]

27. Appear.

Speculation.

Releasing them does not help her campaign. If she spoke about unicorns and rainbows or a generic speech, people would say "Lacks substance, not worth 200k".

What on earth are you expecting to be found in the speech? I can tell you right now it's a generic speech saying how their industry (whatever industry she was at at the time) drives the economy and we're heading into a new Era.

The speech circuit is the same bs, they pay you so they can draw in clients to hear you talk. Then you can talk to your clients about the speaker.

Seriously, what do you think is in there?

No matter what's in them, it's going to be misconstrued because it's crazy primary season.

[revbones]

32. And that just demonstrates the difference

Between someone that is supporting a candidate because of who they are vs someone supporting a candidate because of what they are...

I don't care what is in there. I assume it isn't flattering to her "I'll regulate the banks" stance, but I have enough respect for the truth to want to know why she tells us one thing, but probably told the banks something else. Goldman Sachs doesn't just give millions to be told to "cut it out".

[840high]

30. If she owes favors for

those speeches it matters.

[metroins]

35. On the speech circuit

That's not how things go.

Literally you show up, people tell you where to go, then you bs your way through whatever you're doing and onto the next one.

Real "favors" are done at dinners or phone calls.

[dgauss]

24. "Name one positive way this can help her."

If what she says in those speeches doesn't contradict what she says to the public, if they show she's consistent, it would do a great deal to help her. It would help her push back against suggestions that she's in the pocket of Wall Street and help fight against the perception that she isn't being honest about her relationship to Wall Street. Those are problems for her now and this could help.

[metroins]

38. Context

Out of those speeches, people will jump on any misplaced sentence as out of place and then she's on the defensive even more.

If she said "It's great to be here, we need your industry", that would be spun "Hillary endorses Wall St!"

It's a witch hunt.

[dgauss]

39. I thought you might say that

and to an extent I agree. Especially if she's the nominee facing a shameless republican smear machine.

But right now, as Democrats are weighing her trustworthiness, I think the evaluation would be much more fair.

[PatrickforO]

37. It is not a non-issue.

I want to know what she actually said to these people and when she said it. So does my wife. The reason: we want to make sure we are running the best candidate because if Trump becomes president this country will become a horror show.

To be fair, we are already pretty fervent Bernie supporters, and I honestly feel Bernie is the better candidate because he doesn't pander, he has a plan to bring back the New Deal, which will make ALL of our lives a lot better, and because he is the only candidate we feel cares about us or our kitchen table worries.

So, you can say that I'm being disingenuous calling for the transcripts to be released, but the point remains. We need to really LOOK at Clinton as a candidate, because I honestly don't think she can beat Trump in a general election.

[JackRiddler]

55. This is not about "helping her."

This is about transparency and integrity.

[ohheckyeah]

12. Bullshit -

The whole idea that she should release transcripts isj ust a Bernie Sanddrs made up bullshit challenge he felt safe in making because nobody pays him
to make speeches because he's so friggin annoying.

[Logical]

25. Yes romneys tax returns didn't hurt him. Lol! Nt

[Punkingal]

42. No, it is not a Bernie Sanders made up challenge....

There are many of us who want to know what was in those speeches. She would release them if she didn't have something to hide.

[ohheckyeah]

68. Bullshit.

Sounds like the Republican talking point about wiretapping - what's vthe problem with the government listening to your phone calls if you have nothing to hide?

[dana_b]

52. it's illegal for him to accept money for speeches

and it's not a b.s. challenge as SO many people want to see them. Not just Bernie. It's about her honesty and integrity. If she can't do it, I know she's hiding a lot. And yes, she is asking for the most powerful job in the world so I do think it matters!

[JackRiddler]

56. I'm sure a man of his talents could have sold himself to higher bidders.

Instead he serves millions of clients for $27 a pop. What a sucker, right?

But you know who makes the Clintons look like a total piker at this game? Trump, of course. Romney too. Look at what kind of cash they rack up! The Clinton swag is peanuts by comparison. So those are worthy and better people, much less annoying, right?

[SDjack]

20. It would be funny if her speeches are cut-and-paste from work of others, and

she got paid a fortune for mouthing the cobbled sentences.

[Buns_of_Fire]

62. I'm thinking a combination of Rodney Dangerfield and Bob Hope.

She gave JPMorgan Chase all of Goldman Sachs' secrets.

She gave Goldman Sachs all of JPMorgan Chase's secrets.

And she gave BOTH of them the secrets of the Rosicrucians and the cure for nose warts.

I'm not sure what the American Camping Association got out of her appearance there, unless it was a demonstration of how easy it is to start a campfire with $100 bills.

[NanceGreggs]

33. No one is interested in those transcripts ...

... except BS supporters hoping for a gotcha moment. There is absolutely no other purpose in wanting them.

I have yet to hear anyone explain why - if HRC wanted to tell anyone at GS or elsewhere that she would "do anything to protect them", etc. - she would do so in a speech in front of a roomful of people. If she wanted to send such signals, why not do so in one-on-one discussions with the PTB at such firms - truly "behind closed doors" where no one would be privy to the conversation other than who she wanted to be there, and in circumstances under which she could deny ever having had such discussions at all?

HRC's speaking engagement contracts state that there will be a court reporter in attendance to prepare a transcript. Why take the risk of that transcript being "leaked" when she could just as easily have said that no record be made of what she'd said? If she was going to say anything untoward, why would SHE insist on there being any record at all?

"Big banks never invited Bernie for a paid speech b/c they knew he was for the common man."

Actually, they probably never invited Bernie because he's been spouting the exact same talking points for decades. If you've heard one Bernie speech, you've heard them all. Why pay a cent for the same boring blah, blah, blah that anyone can access free of charge?

When Bernie was riding high last summer with well-attended rallies and poll numbers on the rise, those transcripts weren't even a blip on anyone's radar. It's no coincidence that they became "an issue" among BS supporters when his poll numbers started to stagnate. Now that the delegate math shows that Bernie's shot at the nomination is pretty much non-existent, the transcripts have become a last-ditch hope-against-hope that they contain something the BSers can use against her to turn the tide.

If you really want an example of transparency, I'll give you one: The motive behind BS supporters clamouring for those transcripts is as transparent as it gets.

[BeanMusical]

49. Your concern is duly noted.

[NanceGreggs]

50. In case you haven't noticed ...

... the only people who are "concerned" are the Bernie supporters who are desperate to find something Bernie can use against HRC to turn the tide.

[BeanMusical]

53. Woosh!

It went way over your head.

[NanceGreggs]

57. Well, I'm sure that's your story ...

... and you'll be sticking to it.

It's of absolutely no consequence to me.

[Beowulf]

58. The New York Times has called on Hillary to release the transcripts,

and they endorsed her. So, I guess it isn't just Bernie supporters

[NanceGreggs]

59. The NYT is a newspaper ...

... and whether they endorsed her or not, they'd never turn their nose up at the chance to run a juicy story that sells papers.

Look, it's not my fault that Bernie can't win the nomination on his own merits, and has to hope there's a "47%er" statement buried in a transcript somewhere that can save him.

[Beowulf]

63. If you are reducing the NYT motives to greed,

what does that say about your seriously flawed candidate who accepts $225,000 for a speech? Corporations made her a millionaire many times over, but Hillary asks us to accept that it doesn't influence her decision making. I've read enough annual reports of major corporations to know that how a company talks to the public about its mission and values and how it talks to its shareholders can be very different.

You seem to be quite comfortable with what appears to be Hillary's duplicity. Hillary right or wrong, I guess. If I thought for one second Bernie was a hypocrite, was being deceitful in how he was representing himself, I'd drop my support for him immediately. He has his flaws to be sure, insincerity isn't one of them.

[Fumesucker]

70. Hillaryland is an even stranger place than you might imagine...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x5314138

[BeanMusical]

71. +1

[NanceGreggs]

72. Reducing motives to greed?

The NYT is in the business of selling newspapers. Do you think that any business that wants to increase its sales is "greedy"?




"If I thought for one second Bernie was a hypocrite ..."

I guess you missed my sig line:

"It would be hypocritical of me to run as a Democrat because of the things I have said about the party." - Bernie Sanders

So was he lying then, or is he a hypocrite now?

[NurseJackie]

61. Nicely done! Thank you!

[Red Oak]

36. Bernie should offer her $250,000 each for a copy of the Goldman transcripts

If they are worth that much, let's pay up.

Then the nomination would be over in days as people see what a two faced person Hillary is.

[highprincipleswork]

51. Too bad Jimmy Carter's nephew wasn't there for them. Feel sure even her supporters would be dismayed

[NurseJackie]

60. Awww...

[Jitter65]

64. She's doing that the f - -k with you.

[giftedgirl77]

66. Do you get paid by the OP or individually for every response?