Do you suppose attendees to HRC's GS speeches were frisked for recording devices?
My first reaction on being told I can't do something "just because" is almost always to start thinking of ways to do that thing, I might not do it but I'll be thinking of ways to accomplish what I've been arbitrarily told not to do. I guess you could call me an anti-authoritarian. I'm a little unusual but far from unique, someone in the fairly smart crowd listening to Hillary was thinking of ways to record her speech simply because they they were told not to, it's only human.
Another issue is Goldman Sachs big wheels themselves, these are the type of men, and they are mostly men, who wear a belt and suspenders for redundancy. Sure they have purchased Hillary Clinton they think to themselves but will she _stay_ bought? A surreptitious recording of her telling them things she doesn't want made public is just good business, a belt in your pants loops when you are already wearing suspenders.
It's all but certain there is a recording or multiple recordings of Hillary's GS speeches, the bigger question is who has one or more such recordings now? Trump is the most likely I think, he's a blowhard sure but he's a very media savvy blowhard who has already torpedoed one campaign with inside information.
Those speeches are most likely radioactive and a recording or even better a video could be worth fairly big money or maybe really big money if the content is explosive enough. Of course the recording will be worth far more on the market after the nominations and during the general than it is now during the primaries where the only real customer is Bernie Sanders who probably wouldn't go that route anyway.
Think like a member of the 1%, if you had a recording worth potentially millions would you forfeit the money to help someone else you may not even like?
= new reply since forum marked as read
them?
