HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Forums » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » When Will Hillary Clinton...

Thu May 12, 2016, 09:04 AM

 

When Will Hillary Clinton Release Her Wall Street Transcripts?

Last edited Sat May 14, 2016, 01:23 PM - Edit history (1)

She needs to do it soon because this charade is dragging the democratic party through the mud and giving the republicans a plenty of ammo to make the us look bad.

You know Trump is gonna unleash on them soon, so it is time to just release them.


256 replies, 9498 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 256 replies Author Time Post
Reply When Will Hillary Clinton Release Her Wall Street Transcripts? (Original post)
coffeeAM May 2016 OP
seabeyond May 2016 #1
coffeeAM May 2016 #8
thesquanderer May 2016 #20
seabeyond May 2016 #45
GummyBearz May 2016 #49
dchill May 2016 #55
seabeyond May 2016 #106
GummyBearz May 2016 #116
seabeyond May 2016 #118
GummyBearz May 2016 #122
seabeyond May 2016 #156
GummyBearz May 2016 #159
coffeeAM May 2016 #174
GummyBearz May 2016 #176
coffeeAM May 2016 #181
coffeeAM May 2016 #123
seabeyond May 2016 #157
seabeyond May 2016 #44
coffeeAM May 2016 #48
George II May 2016 #60
seabeyond May 2016 #64
spinboas May 2016 #223
reddread May 2016 #161
brush May 2016 #201
Name removed May 2016 #210
polly7 May 2016 #21
Sheepshank May 2016 #25
polly7 May 2016 #32
Sheepshank May 2016 #75
polly7 May 2016 #77
Sheepshank May 2016 #79
polly7 May 2016 #80
Sheepshank May 2016 #85
polly7 May 2016 #86
George II May 2016 #125
polly7 May 2016 #128
George II May 2016 #132
polly7 May 2016 #133
COLGATE4 May 2016 #61
seabeyond May 2016 #46
polly7 May 2016 #47
seabeyond May 2016 #62
polly7 May 2016 #71
seabeyond May 2016 #105
polly7 May 2016 #107
seabeyond May 2016 #110
polly7 May 2016 #112
seabeyond May 2016 #113
polly7 May 2016 #117
seabeyond May 2016 #119
polly7 May 2016 #120
George II May 2016 #126
LisaM May 2016 #179
spinboas May 2016 #224
Orsino May 2016 #160
seabeyond May 2016 #164
Orsino May 2016 #165
seabeyond May 2016 #166
Orsino May 2016 #167
seabeyond May 2016 #168
Orsino May 2016 #169
seabeyond May 2016 #170
Orsino May 2016 #171
seabeyond May 2016 #172
coffeeAM May 2016 #173
seabeyond May 2016 #192
coffeeAM May 2016 #195
seabeyond May 2016 #197
coffeeAM May 2016 #206
seabeyond May 2016 #216
Orsino May 2016 #226
seabeyond May 2016 #227
Orsino May 2016 #230
seabeyond May 2016 #231
Orsino May 2016 #232
seabeyond May 2016 #233
Orsino May 2016 #234
seabeyond May 2016 #235
Orsino May 2016 #236
seabeyond May 2016 #237
pinskinny May 2016 #239
Orsino May 2016 #253
NorthCarolina May 2016 #211
seabeyond May 2016 #212
NorthCarolina May 2016 #213
seabeyond May 2016 #215
reddread May 2016 #214
seabeyond May 2016 #217
reddread May 2016 #218
seabeyond May 2016 #219
reddread May 2016 #220
seabeyond May 2016 #221
thesquanderer May 2016 #2
blm May 2016 #13
thesquanderer May 2016 #18
blm May 2016 #22
GummyBearz May 2016 #56
NewImproved Deal May 2016 #3
NurseJackie May 2016 #7
Merryland May 2016 #29
reddread May 2016 #34
Ohioblue22 May 2016 #42
polly7 May 2016 #50
Ohioblue22 May 2016 #83
NurseJackie May 2016 #4
cwydro May 2016 #5
NurseJackie May 2016 #24
griffi94 May 2016 #6
Merryland May 2016 #28
griffi94 May 2016 #30
laruemtt May 2016 #9
COLGATE4 May 2016 #65
Arkansas Granny May 2016 #10
dana_b May 2016 #93
SmittynMo May 2016 #11
laruemtt May 2016 #12
Buzz Clik May 2016 #14
DemocratSinceBirth May 2016 #16
ebayfool May 2016 #94
DemocratSinceBirth May 2016 #96
ebayfool May 2016 #97
DemocratSinceBirth May 2016 #98
ebayfool May 2016 #99
yallerdawg May 2016 #15
Lindsixo May 2016 #104
yallerdawg May 2016 #108
polly7 May 2016 #17
COLGATE4 May 2016 #66
polly7 May 2016 #100
COLGATE4 May 2016 #134
polly7 May 2016 #135
COLGATE4 May 2016 #136
polly7 May 2016 #137
COLGATE4 May 2016 #139
polly7 May 2016 #140
COLGATE4 May 2016 #141
polly7 May 2016 #142
COLGATE4 May 2016 #144
polly7 May 2016 #145
COLGATE4 May 2016 #146
polly7 May 2016 #147
COLGATE4 May 2016 #150
polly7 May 2016 #153
COLGATE4 May 2016 #154
polly7 May 2016 #155
pinskinny May 2016 #240
COLGATE4 May 2016 #241
pinskinny May 2016 #242
COLGATE4 May 2016 #243
pinskinny May 2016 #244
COLGATE4 May 2016 #245
pinskinny May 2016 #247
COLGATE4 May 2016 #252
Name removed May 2016 #254
JustABozoOnThisBus May 2016 #19
tonyt53 May 2016 #35
Darkhawk32 May 2016 #23
coffeeAM May 2016 #39
zappaman May 2016 #63
Merryland May 2016 #26
COLGATE4 May 2016 #67
Lindsixo May 2016 #74
Name removed May 2016 #209
oldandhappy May 2016 #27
krawhitham May 2016 #31
procon May 2016 #57
COLGATE4 May 2016 #68
PufPuf23 May 2016 #33
coffeeAM May 2016 #38
840high May 2016 #131
George II May 2016 #36
DetlefK May 2016 #37
ebayfool May 2016 #95
Ohioblue22 May 2016 #40
coffeeAM May 2016 #43
COLGATE4 May 2016 #69
coffeeAM May 2016 #72
COLGATE4 May 2016 #73
Ohioblue22 May 2016 #82
LineLineLineLineReply ?
coffeeAM May 2016 #91
lumberjack_jeff May 2016 #111
Ohioblue22 May 2016 #121
procon May 2016 #41
brewens May 2016 #51
Lil Missy May 2016 #52
B Calm May 2016 #53
Skwmom May 2016 #54
B Calm May 2016 #58
COLGATE4 May 2016 #70
lumberjack_jeff May 2016 #59
yourout May 2016 #76
Rass May 2016 #78
jamese777 May 2016 #81
coffeeAM May 2016 #84
Fla Dem May 2016 #163
Lindsixo May 2016 #196
spinboas May 2016 #222
Rass May 2016 #90
BootinUp May 2016 #87
Lindsixo May 2016 #114
Ferd Berfel May 2016 #88
rjsquirrel May 2016 #89
coffeeAM May 2016 #92
Lindsixo May 2016 #101
George II May 2016 #115
coffeeAM May 2016 #124
rjsquirrel May 2016 #102
DesertRat May 2016 #103
lumberjack_jeff May 2016 #109
SusanCalvin May 2016 #127
Gomez163 May 2016 #129
coffeeAM May 2016 #138
Gomez163 May 2016 #143
coffeeAM May 2016 #149
silvershadow May 2016 #130
reddread May 2016 #162
pansypoo53219 May 2016 #148
Jackie Wilson Said May 2016 #151
MrMickeysMom May 2016 #249
SylviaD May 2016 #152
redStateBlueHeart May 2016 #158
Lindsixo May 2016 #175
coffeeAM May 2016 #183
Lindsixo May 2016 #184
coffeeAM May 2016 #185
coffeeAM May 2016 #191
Lindsixo May 2016 #193
coffeeAM May 2016 #194
Rhiannon12866 May 2016 #204
doc03 May 2016 #177
Thinkingabout May 2016 #178
coffeeAM May 2016 #186
Thinkingabout May 2016 #188
coffeeAM May 2016 #189
coffeeAM May 2016 #198
Thinkingabout May 2016 #200
coffeeAM May 2016 #203
Lindsixo May 2016 #187
MrMickeysMom May 2016 #248
Jarqui May 2016 #180
deathrind May 2016 #182
laserhaas May 2016 #190
Tierra_y_Libertad May 2016 #199
NewImproved Deal May 2016 #202
coffeeAM May 2016 #205
Recursion May 2016 #207
Name removed May 2016 #208
spinboas May 2016 #225
primnickel May 2016 #229
Cheese Sandwich May 2016 #228
pinskinny May 2016 #238
Logical May 2016 #246
pinskinny May 2016 #250
Logical May 2016 #251
primnickel May 2016 #256
AzDar May 2016 #255

Response to coffeeAM (Original post)

Thu May 12, 2016, 09:05 AM

1. Nevah. Nor should she. None of your business. What is Sanders hiding with tax returns?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeyond (Reply #1)

Thu May 12, 2016, 09:10 AM

8. I am sure that argument will go over well with the General election voters.

 

You know the people that do not sit in front of their tv watching cable news 24/7. More like the people that watch reality shows and read the enquirer at the check out line.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Reply #8)

Thu May 12, 2016, 09:19 AM

20. Her transcripts matter most to those who have no intention of ever voting for her anyway.

Likewise with Trump's tax returns.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to thesquanderer (Reply #20)

Thu May 12, 2016, 10:20 AM

45. Exactly.... Only used for a tool to attack. Nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeyond (Reply #45)

Thu May 12, 2016, 10:28 AM

49. Doesn't that make it a problem?

 

Why not release them and defuse the attack. I'm sure she told Goldman how she would never allow another bank bailout at tax payers expense, and would break them up so they were not "too big to fail". Right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GummyBearz (Reply #49)

Thu May 12, 2016, 10:35 AM

55. Absolutely, squeaky clean, nothing to hide...

so what's she waiting for?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GummyBearz (Reply #49)

Thu May 12, 2016, 02:57 PM

106. There will always be another demand. No.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeyond (Reply #106)

Thu May 12, 2016, 03:33 PM

116. Oh

 

Ok... I guess this one is just too big of a demand? She released like 50,000 emails, but a few hours worth of speeches is too much? I just wonder why? Hmm...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GummyBearz (Reply #116)

Thu May 12, 2016, 03:52 PM

118. Yes, it is. Personal life that had nothing to do with govermental position. None of your business.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeyond (Reply #118)

Thu May 12, 2016, 04:36 PM

122. The nature and beliefs of my future commander in chief is my business

 

That is how we decide which one we vote for.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GummyBearz (Reply #122)

Thu May 12, 2016, 07:25 PM

156. Then I want to Sanders taxes, know about sending toxins to to Texas, selling his vote to Democrats.

 

The conversation he had with Lockheed/Martin, NRA and What he said about women at playboy. My right.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeyond (Reply #156)

Fri May 13, 2016, 08:50 AM

159. Yea, someone should ask him those questions

 

Go ahead and ask him, I'd like to know more about him as well

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GummyBearz (Reply #159)

Fri May 13, 2016, 04:19 PM

174. What do yu want to know?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Reply #174)

Fri May 13, 2016, 04:34 PM

176. Everything

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GummyBearz (Reply #176)

Fri May 13, 2016, 04:51 PM

181. What do you mean?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeyond (Reply #118)

Thu May 12, 2016, 04:41 PM

123. A democratic Predidents Job is to keep wall street in check.

 

So we need to see the transcripts to make sure this would be achieved by President Clinton.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Reply #123)

Thu May 12, 2016, 07:26 PM

157. You can see by her 2007 plan she put together to address it. More than what Sanders has.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Reply #8)

Thu May 12, 2016, 10:19 AM

44. Ya, now the RW can pick up on what Sanders started, not that anyone cares, just something to pound

 

Clinton over the head with. And just think, If Sanders hadn't started this whole faux outrage, we wouldn't have to go thru it during GE.

Thanks Sanders.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeyond (Reply #44)

Thu May 12, 2016, 10:27 AM

48. Just release them and we will not have to go through this, it is that simple!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Reply #48)

Thu May 12, 2016, 10:45 AM

60. "We" aren't going through anything, the Sanders people are going through it for some odd reason.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Reply #48)

Thu May 12, 2016, 11:16 AM

64. No. By gosh, make your demands and expect them followed. No. I want Sanders taxes.

 

I want Sanders health reports. I want the notes when Sanders sold his vote to the Democratic party. I want to hear what Sanders was saying when discussing food lines to be a good thing. Give ME!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Reply #48)

Tue May 17, 2016, 05:32 PM

223. +100

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeyond (Reply #44)

Fri May 13, 2016, 08:57 AM

161. what world is this?

 

I hate to discount you completely, but to do otherwise
would be pretty stupid.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Reply #8)

Sat May 14, 2016, 03:13 PM

201. Why? She was a private citizen then, not serving in an elected or appointed public office . . .

so there is no quid-pro-quo in question.

Additionally, what men have been asked to release transcripts?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Reply #8)


Response to seabeyond (Reply #1)

Thu May 12, 2016, 09:20 AM

21. Was Mitt Romney's leaked 47% remark no-one's business? nt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to polly7 (Reply #21)

Thu May 12, 2016, 09:36 AM

25. all those speeches, all those thousands of attendees and waiters and no leaking?

 

there's something very fishy about that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sheepshank (Reply #25)

Thu May 12, 2016, 09:43 AM

32. I've read that she forbade anyone but her own transcriber to keep record of a single word she

said at those speeches. Also, that someone who attended one to a Wall Street corporation said she spoke so glowingly of them she may as well have been an executive. There is no way in hell she would speak against their predatory practices for that kind of money, also no way in hell they wouldn't be fully convinced their pay-to-play wouldn't buy favourable actions from her, knowing she was running for President. I don't know why she believes people are so stupid.

Mitt Romney's 47% remarks would never have become public either were it not for one brave person with a cellphone camera.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to polly7 (Reply #32)

Thu May 12, 2016, 12:15 PM

75. she can say what she wants, people with an agenda will do what they will

 

I'm pretty sure Snowden was told not to release data.
The waiter with the cell phone also did what he wanted.

The Bernie crowd has already made fun of her telling Wall Street to "cut it out"...are you saying now that it worked?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sheepshank (Reply #75)

Thu May 12, 2016, 12:24 PM

77. Oh quit with the straw-man bullshit. I'm talking about her speeches to

predatory contributors to suffering around the world.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to polly7 (Reply #77)

Thu May 12, 2016, 12:37 PM

79. your explanation was piled deep and broad here.

 

As if those with an agenda, could not have leaked info.

One of you co-horts on another thread claims to have found some long lost quote from a bank speech....is that then a lie? you calling your fellow Bernie Supporter a liar? Here, let me make it easy for you: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1948716

of course it was unsourced, but that doesn't matter to the likes of you, does it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sheepshank (Reply #79)

Thu May 12, 2016, 12:41 PM

80. The likes of me?

I posted my opinion, the only agenda I have is against anyone, anywhere who supports the predatory super-billionaires spreading their suffering around the planet. Maybe 'the likes of you' have to look beyond your single-minded 'agenda' of preserving the status quo at all cost - those not making it under it are of no concern to you, are they?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to polly7 (Reply #80)

Thu May 12, 2016, 12:50 PM

85. Yes, you have opinions and they often mean squat to me

 

and you are big on opinions you try to pass as facts...just like the link I gave you, with un-sourced info..."the like of you" tend to pass of hit pieces, as fact.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sheepshank (Reply #85)

Thu May 12, 2016, 12:51 PM

86. And yours and 'the likes of you' mean squat to me.

Last edited Thu May 12, 2016, 01:29 PM - Edit history (1)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to polly7 (Reply #32)

Thu May 12, 2016, 04:47 PM

125. I've read that she allowed anyone who asked to be allowed in the room(s).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #125)

Thu May 12, 2016, 04:50 PM

128. Really? That's odd ........... never seen mention of that at all.

You'd think those huge corporations and banks would be more concerned about who attended their events. I doubt they'd allow just anyone with an interest to attend. Strange, if they were so open to the public, there'd be no transcripts or video ........... anywhere.

What's with the white-noise machine she used recently? Obviously she didn't want 'outsiders' to hear what she was saying. Doesn't make sense, if she was as open to outside scrutiny as you claim.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to polly7 (Reply #128)

Thu May 12, 2016, 05:06 PM

132. Nor I your "I've read....."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #132)

Thu May 12, 2016, 05:07 PM

133. I've read it HERE. Good try though. nt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sheepshank (Reply #25)

Thu May 12, 2016, 11:13 AM

61. Yep. It's almost like there's nothing there.

Amazing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to polly7 (Reply #21)

Thu May 12, 2016, 10:22 AM

46. It was a gotcha moment, and no, not really. I get you are looking for a gotcha. Hey, I want to hear

 

Sanders conversation with the Democratic party selling his vote to them in '91, or chatting about how food lines are a good thing. Might find some gotcha there too. Or conversation with a bunch of men at Playboy. Lets see what he says about women.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeyond (Reply #46)

Thu May 12, 2016, 10:26 AM

47. It was more than a 'gotcha' moment.

I can completely understand why you need to minimize the importance of where possible presidential loyalties really lie, but that 47% 'gotcha moment' (is that like Palin's 'gotcha' moments re journalists questions???) firmly cemented in millions of people's minds how corruptible he was and how little he cared about the 'little people'.

Preserve the status quo at all cost!

The rest of your post makes no fucking sense whatsoever.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to polly7 (Reply #47)

Thu May 12, 2016, 11:15 AM

62. Of course it became a gotcha moment. So, lets demand peoples diary entry so we can really see what

 

they think.

Hey.... why not the same for Sanders? Doesn't work that way for you though, as you make a post of fabricated accusations of insults.

You do not have the same expectation of your candidate as you do the one you oppose. I am consistent. You are not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeyond (Reply #62)

Thu May 12, 2016, 11:36 AM

71. Wtf are you going on about? Not a single reply to what I said.

Sanders never gave speeches to Big Banks pushing the TPP, Wall Street predators, global giant corporations. She said she was the most transparent politician running, and that she'd release the transcripts when everyone else did - that was a 'gotcha' moment, no? - she fucking knows no-one else made millions being paid by the people ruining the lives of millions.

FFS.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to polly7 (Reply #71)

Thu May 12, 2016, 02:56 PM

105. WTF are you going on about. Personal earning outside of government, bad. Sanders within government

 

doesn't have to be transparent. Got it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeyond (Reply #105)

Thu May 12, 2016, 02:58 PM

107. She was planning on running for President.

The MSM had been going on about even in 2014. Your 'personal earning' meme is complete bullshit. All those speeches were pay-to-play - and those corporations and banks causing so much suffering throughout the world knew damned well she was going to run. Get it???

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to polly7 (Reply #107)

Thu May 12, 2016, 03:01 PM

110. She was planning on...? Cough up personal, private stuff. Sanders not planning so hide his stuff?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeyond (Reply #110)

Thu May 12, 2016, 03:02 PM

112. Good god.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to polly7 (Reply #112)

Thu May 12, 2016, 03:03 PM

113. I know, right?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeyond (Reply #113)

Thu May 12, 2016, 03:47 PM

117. I'm glad you know. Exactly what ........ I have no idea. nt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to polly7 (Reply #117)

Thu May 12, 2016, 03:54 PM

119. Wow, witty, .... Bah ha hahahah.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeyond (Reply #119)

Thu May 12, 2016, 04:01 PM

120. Wasn't meant to be witty.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeyond (Reply #46)

Thu May 12, 2016, 04:48 PM

126. I posted some of that a few months ago, it got hidden in a Burlington minute.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to polly7 (Reply #21)

Fri May 13, 2016, 04:41 PM

179. I believe the remarks were made at an actual campaign event

so far more relevant.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to polly7 (Reply #21)

Tue May 17, 2016, 05:36 PM

224. +100

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeyond (Reply #1)

Fri May 13, 2016, 08:55 AM

160. Private addresses for money to the architects of the Great Recession ought not to remain hidden.

Looks corrupt as hell to keep hiding them. Up to Clinton to dispel our suspicions, and she can do it any time she likes.

Unless Goldman-Sachs has her under an NDA. Should a future president have a prior oath to our enemies?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Orsino (Reply #160)

Fri May 13, 2016, 09:46 AM

164. No it does not look corrupt. It looks like a desperate campaign looking for a gotcha, dependent

 

on outside circumstance to beat an already winner, Clinton.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeyond (Reply #164)

Fri May 13, 2016, 09:47 AM

165. That's not what hiding transcripts looks like. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Orsino (Reply #165)

Fri May 13, 2016, 10:20 AM

166. Nothing about hiding. All about... none of your business. See how you create your scenario. Hiding?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeyond (Reply #166)

Fri May 13, 2016, 10:23 AM

167. Hidden per the contracts she signed. That's her creation..

..unless there is some secret agreement with G-S that prevents her simply publishing the transcripts she owns.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Orsino (Reply #167)

Fri May 13, 2016, 10:24 AM

168. As it should be. This was handled in normal fashion. Absolutely.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeyond (Reply #168)

Fri May 13, 2016, 10:28 AM

169. Normal for wealthy elites who block journalistic access...

...and bar anyone else from making a record.

However, the voters live on Planet Earth.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Orsino (Reply #169)

Fri May 13, 2016, 11:03 AM

170. Speakers and their material, end of story. Again, creating a bullshit scenario.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeyond (Reply #170)

Fri May 13, 2016, 11:15 AM

171. What's in the transcripts that only Clinton and G-S should know? n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Orsino (Reply #171)

Fri May 13, 2016, 02:56 PM

172. Her personal stuff, in her personal life, that is none of your business. She does not need to

 

justify that time in her life nor give you documents from teh job she was doing. You do not get to look at her diary, either.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeyond (Reply #172)

Fri May 13, 2016, 04:15 PM

173. Giving speeches to wall street is not her personal business once she decided to run for president!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Reply #173)

Sat May 14, 2016, 09:49 AM

192. Yes. It is.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeyond (Reply #192)

Sat May 14, 2016, 01:01 PM

195. Ya, in your dreams.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Reply #195)

Sat May 14, 2016, 02:20 PM

197. What a silly comment. This was done in her personal, private world nothing to do with a gov position

 

Kerry didn't have to provide his small business information. No other speaker for any reason being demanded to give up speech notes. None of your business. You all make a demand. And expect Clinton to provide. Not consistent. Not asked of others. NO.

We cannot even get Sanders taxes. He has no right to make demands of any one else. Just another example of his hypocrisy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeyond (Reply #197)

Sun May 15, 2016, 11:45 PM

206. Oh come on, you really do not believe that..

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Reply #206)

Tue May 17, 2016, 09:19 AM

216. Don't tell me what I believe or not. I think its petty yelling,... transcripts. Looking for a gotcha

 

I think these demands that are constantly put on Clinton is all about her being a woman and the diffferent standards we live to men.

Do not tell a me what I believe, how arrogant.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeyond (Reply #216)

Wed May 18, 2016, 02:09 PM

226. What was so special in these talks to auditoriums full of G-S personnel...

...that her contracts barred any other recording of the events?

"Personal"? That's ludicrous. "Private," yes, but that was more or less my point. Why were these speeches so private? What is her secret agenda in dealing with the authors of the Great Recession?

"Cut it out" wouldn't need to remain a secret. Something else is in there, and I suspect it's chummier than Clinton has so far let on.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Orsino (Reply #226)

Wed May 18, 2016, 05:47 PM

227. Nothing is special, and still... none of your business. People do not get to make demands of Clinton

 

and just expect her to meet your demands.

None of your business.

No gotcha. Nothing special and still....

None of your business.

People do not get this. All the past, all those today, no running president has not had this demand placed on them. But, Sanders decides he wants to see her transcripts and demands she accommodates. No.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeyond (Reply #227)

Thu May 19, 2016, 12:13 PM

230. Pathetic spin.

The actions and agenda of a presidential candidate are indeed subject to special scrutiny. Typically, this means television or print coverage, or the presence of reporters who make teir own recordings for later transcription/commentary.

"Personal" is a silly label when she didn't know and never met most of the people in those rooms.

"Special," undoubtedly, since she took unprecedented care to ensure that only she could reveal the texts of her speeches. Just exactly what was so special, though, remains her secret.

I think it's mostly because her tone was too chummy or too laudatory, and would contradict her "cut it out" claim.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Orsino (Reply #230)

Thu May 19, 2016, 12:23 PM

231. I do not think it is spin at all. I would strongly advocate that Clinton does not buckle under your

 

and Sanders demand. Never enough, always demands, ... No.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeyond (Reply #231)

Thu May 19, 2016, 12:26 PM

232. I think we should demand openness of our candidates...

...to include financial disclosures and tax returns.

Particularly the "private" assurances or harangues Clinton made to the architects of financial ruin when she tnought none of us could hear.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Orsino (Reply #232)

Thu May 19, 2016, 12:28 PM

233. I want Sanders taxes, Discussion on how grand food lines are, Theories on overthrowing SAmerica

 

countries, conversations with communist Russia.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeyond (Reply #233)

Thu May 19, 2016, 12:42 PM

234. This makes no sense when excusing Clinton...

...from disclosure on her secret addresses to the financial sector in the run-up to her candidacy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Orsino (Reply #234)

Thu May 19, 2016, 12:45 PM

235. I think it is outrageous for me to demand Sanders hidden conversations on communism and

 

his true beliefs of socialism, which absolutely has a huge impact on his governing style, as it is outrageous demanding Clintons transcripts. The difference. We would NEVER make that demand of Sanders, or any man in the same posiiton of Clinton. What us women know, is making these demands of women are normal, and people expect and further demand a woman comply. How dare she say no to Sanders. Pisses him and his people off that much more.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeyond (Reply #235)

Thu May 19, 2016, 12:52 PM

236. Nonsense.

We need to know what our likely nominee and Goldman-Sachs have planned for us.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Orsino (Reply #236)

Thu May 19, 2016, 03:08 PM

237. As I want to know Sanders Socialist/Communist positions.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeyond (Reply #227)

Thu May 19, 2016, 10:02 PM

239. I believe it is my business since she is running to be president of the country.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pinskinny (Reply #239)

Fri May 20, 2016, 10:55 AM

253. If we can't get those transcripts...

...is it because they locked up under a secret NDA with G-S, are classified, are unflattering, or have been lost?

Or is there another explanation for the continued secrecy?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeyond (Reply #1)

Tue May 17, 2016, 08:54 AM

211. She is running for the highest office in the land, and yet you tell voters "none of your business"?

 

Really, none of our business, just vote and hope for the best?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NorthCarolina (Reply #211)

Tue May 17, 2016, 08:59 AM

212. You cannot take a peek into her diary, either.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeyond (Reply #212)

Tue May 17, 2016, 09:01 AM

213. Please...

 

you embarrass yourself.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NorthCarolina (Reply #213)

Tue May 17, 2016, 09:15 AM

215. No, I do not. Because I do not fall in with your agenda is no embarrassment at all.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeyond (Reply #1)

Tue May 17, 2016, 09:05 AM

214. that ugly word democracy is so passe

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to reddread (Reply #214)

Tue May 17, 2016, 09:20 AM

217. Except, Clinton is the only one having these demands made on her. No other politician, ever.

 

I do not buy it. I think it petty. I think it is all about arrogance of man, making his demand, looking for a gotcha.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeyond (Reply #217)

Tue May 17, 2016, 09:23 AM

218. after the massive meltdown, bailout and the dead sea that is our current economy?

 

nothing to see there?
payday loans.
falsified mortgage paperwork and foreclosures.
a list so long I will just stop here, knowing you know it too.

what issues concern you?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to reddread (Reply #218)

Tue May 17, 2016, 09:26 AM

219. Ya. I dunno. That would be the Repugs to go after. I get Sanders and his "Dems" are more comfortable

 

attacking Dems, totally ignoring the Repugs that brought us that, by again, I do not buy that agenda.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeyond (Reply #219)

Tue May 17, 2016, 09:31 AM

220. republican or Democrat, the economy matters

 

so what issues beside affiliation concern you?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to reddread (Reply #220)

Tue May 17, 2016, 09:58 AM

221. I do not get your post

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Original post)

Thu May 12, 2016, 09:07 AM

2. If Trump isn't going to release his taxes, I don't know that he'd make an issue over her transcripts

In the mean time, I don't see Hillary doing anything that could complicate her path to the nomination. For her not to have released them early on, I think it's safe to assume that there's a source of some bad PR in them, even if they are truly fundamentally benign. Even if only in the way one phrases the same idea to a group of people friendly to an idea than you would present it to the general public. So I don't assume there's anything truly terrible in them, but yeah, for her to have felt the bad PR of not releasing them was worth it, she must feel that the PR would be worse if she released them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to thesquanderer (Reply #2)

Thu May 12, 2016, 09:14 AM

13. Trump has many speech transcripts, too. Wasn't he the highest paid speaker on the circuit

for many years?

Of course, what IDIOTS would pay to hear Mr Word Salad? The same ones who pay Ms Word Salad Palin.

Idiots.

And when are DUers going to stop pretending that Trump is all powerful and untouchable on this level? OPs like this one are all about deflating Dems as if they have no counter to what Trump does or will do going into November. I think this post is exceedingly disingenuous.

Plus:
What's with your use of the word 'us', anyway? You think WE should be shivering in our boots and need to buy into every lie and 'scandal' the GOP propaganda machine crafted for us? They do that 24/7 nonstop since 1980. Guess you never bothered to NOTICE, eh?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to blm (Reply #13)

Thu May 12, 2016, 09:18 AM

18. Hillary has transcripts of her speeches. Donald probably does not.

Donald mostly speaks off the cuff, and I would not be surprised if he had no interest in having anyone transcribe what he said.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to thesquanderer (Reply #18)

Thu May 12, 2016, 09:22 AM

22. Not the point, is it? You can shiver in your boots and entertain the RW propagandists

all you want, but, those of us armed with insight into how they operate on the internet will not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to blm (Reply #22)

Thu May 12, 2016, 10:35 AM

56. I don't remember trump using static noise to prevent people from hearing his speeches

 

It is odd that someone who is supposed to be opposed to Trump's crazy ideas wants to keep her speeches so secret.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/hillary-clinton-static-noise-speech_us_570930dae4b0836057a16748

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Original post)

Thu May 12, 2016, 09:08 AM

3. Yep. The Former First Lady...

 

...is more Nixonian than Nixon.

[link:?1459715983|

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NewImproved Deal (Reply #3)

Thu May 12, 2016, 09:10 AM

7. A polite way for Hillary to say "Kiss My Ass".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NewImproved Deal (Reply #3)

Thu May 12, 2016, 09:40 AM

29. Hillary's Dislikebility factor is captured in that smug smile & quote. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NewImproved Deal (Reply #3)

Thu May 12, 2016, 09:44 AM

34. Nixon x Bush

 

this is the product.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NewImproved Deal (Reply #3)

Thu May 12, 2016, 10:13 AM

42. Benghaziiiiiiiiiiii!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ohioblue22 (Reply #42)

Thu May 12, 2016, 10:29 AM

50. Gee, that's always such a funny reply. It's too bad good people died though. nt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to polly7 (Reply #50)

Thu May 12, 2016, 12:43 PM

83. It's also a pointless witch hunt. It can be more than one

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Original post)

Thu May 12, 2016, 09:08 AM

4. Only when it's to her advantage so to do.

Aside from that, there's really no compelling reason for her to do that. It makes no sense for her to "release the transcripts" simply to flatter the egos of people who have no intentions of voting for her anyway. And the "transcripts" make no difference to anyone else.

Time to face another fact and another disappointment. Bernie fans will not get their "47%" moment. Hillary is too smart for that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Original post)

Thu May 12, 2016, 09:09 AM

5. This is about the millionth thread on this.

Too funny.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cwydro (Reply #5)

Thu May 12, 2016, 09:33 AM

24. To distract from Bernie's FEC legal issues ...

... obviously.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Original post)

Thu May 12, 2016, 09:09 AM

6. Never I hope

What she said in a paid speech as a private citizen
doesn't matter at all.

Al Franken said in his book that he liked speaking at
the private corporate functions because the fees were high.

As far as I know nobody's ever asked for the
transcripts to any of his speeches.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to griffi94 (Reply #6)

Thu May 12, 2016, 09:38 AM

28. He ain't running for President unless I missed something...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Merryland (Reply #28)

Thu May 12, 2016, 09:42 AM

30. He's a senator

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Original post)

Thu May 12, 2016, 09:11 AM

9. What's breathtaking is that

yesterday she was going after Trump to release his tax returns, saying, "What's he hiding?" My mouth just hung open when i saw her saying, "We're' going to get to the bottom of it." Until she releases her transcripts, she's never going to get away with this line of attack on him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to laruemtt (Reply #9)

Thu May 12, 2016, 11:18 AM

65. Yep, because a potential Presidential candidate who has the obligation to disclose

his tax returns just like every other candidate for many years now hasn't done so is obviously equal to someone releasing private speeches given to private groups when she wasn't a candidate. =/=

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Original post)

Thu May 12, 2016, 09:12 AM

10. I don't think she will and I see no reason for her to do so.

She gave those speeches as a private citizen, not an elected official, at a private, not public, affair. End of story.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Arkansas Granny (Reply #10)

Thu May 12, 2016, 02:04 PM

93. She's running for President and she wants our votes

if she doesn't release them and provide full transparency, then I see no reason for her to expect anyone to vote for her.

End of story.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Original post)

Thu May 12, 2016, 09:12 AM

11. The real problem with this

Last edited Thu May 12, 2016, 04:01 PM - Edit history (1)

post is not her transcripts. Who really gives a shit. The REAL problem is the CONSTANT BULLSHIT surrounding HRC. There's always something. I'm guessing people are use to it, and just accept it as part of life.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SmittynMo (Reply #11)

Thu May 12, 2016, 09:14 AM

12. + 1,000!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Original post)

Thu May 12, 2016, 09:15 AM

14. She already did while you were gone. We read them, fell asleep, and moved on.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #14)

Thu May 12, 2016, 09:16 AM

16. What is crazy is Bernie and Donald are the only candidates who refused to release tax returns.

What are they hiding?


I suspect former is much richer than he lets on and the latter is much poorer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #16)

Thu May 12, 2016, 02:11 PM

94. What are you on about? Sanders released his 2014 return, complete and fully. 12 days after ...

saying he would do so. IRS 2015 deadline is just past, unless an extension was needed because of campaigning.

Guess what? He wasn't hiding any pay-for-play Foundations in them!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ebayfool (Reply #94)

Thu May 12, 2016, 02:14 PM

96. One year of tax returns. The Clinton have released thirty!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #96)

Thu May 12, 2016, 02:19 PM

97. Could it be because they've been running for Prez for damn near 30 years, between the 2 of em?

How about 1 tax return for 1 speech?

Clinton's turn.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ebayfool (Reply #97)

Thu May 12, 2016, 02:24 PM

98. Richard Nixon started the tradition of presidential candidates releasing years of tax returns.

Certainly that's not too high a hurdle for the Vermont independent to overcome.

We have two candidates in the race who are reticent to release tax returns. I suspect that is because they would indicate one is much richer than he lets on to be and the other is much poorer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #98)

Thu May 12, 2016, 02:30 PM

99. Oy! I gotta get ready for work.

But will revisit the convo, if you like, when I get off later. Have a good one.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Original post)

Thu May 12, 2016, 09:15 AM

15. How about when everyone else who runs for office...

has to release "transcripts" of speeches they give as private citizens?

We can't even get two candidates to release a record of tax returns like every candidate does!

Let's try to hold everyone to the same standards - even if it is Hillary!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yallerdawg (Reply #15)

Thu May 12, 2016, 02:49 PM

104. No one is saying she has to do it but it's in her best interest.

 

You can't blame voters who withhold their vote as a consequence of her not showing them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lindsixo (Reply #104)

Thu May 12, 2016, 02:59 PM

108. So if we have a President Trump in November...

I shouldn't blame you - "Just release the transcripts, Hillary!"

OK. I won't.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Original post)

Thu May 12, 2016, 09:17 AM

17. I want her to release the transcripts of speeches up here paid for the two big banks

pushing the Keystone XL. Did she talk to them about pipeline safety? How to run a pig down the line? What??? Nah ....... she was voicing her support to them in getting it to pass, all while knowing she was going to run for President. She gave other speeches in various cities sponsored by other groups (mostly also paid for by those big banks) schooling us on 'Terror, Terror'! and how we need to be alert and ready. I guess she forgot Canada lost troops from the very beginning in some of the most dangerous areas in Afghanistan - and the hundreds committing suicide since getting back home. Reporters following the speeches asked her about the Keystone XL, which she never mentioned, and replied "No comment".

As a tax paying citizen, I want to know why my taxes helped pay for someone from another country to give speeches to backers of yet another pipeline that not only affects her own country but ours also.

And yes ............. I do have the right to know.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to polly7 (Reply #17)

Thu May 12, 2016, 11:20 AM

66. Actually, you don't.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to COLGATE4 (Reply #66)

Thu May 12, 2016, 02:33 PM

100. Yes, I do!

My taxes help pay for all of this, in one way or another. It's not just you who are affected by yet another pipeline - Canadians have been protesting it from the start. We don't need a 'private citizen' (if you really believe she had no plans to run for President) from another country pushing it in speeches. If she did, I want to know why.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to polly7 (Reply #100)

Thu May 12, 2016, 05:18 PM

134. I'm confused. Are you a U.S. citizen?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to COLGATE4 (Reply #134)

Thu May 12, 2016, 05:21 PM

135. No. I'm not.

I've said where I was from 200 times here. Why are you confused, I said in my post that Canadians have been protesting the pipeline and we have a right to know why someone from another country is up here speaking to the backers of it. Is she a pipeline safety expert in her personal life? Why wouldn't we be allowed to know what she said to them ...... news articles of her other speeches regarding 'terra!!' were sent out - why the secrecy on the Keystone XL?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to polly7 (Reply #135)

Thu May 12, 2016, 05:34 PM

136. Just wanted to be clear on the facts. Is there an international agreement of some kind that

suggests that citizens of a foreign nation may intervene in the internal political affairs of another nation, demanding that one of its candidates provide some given 'information'?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to COLGATE4 (Reply #136)

Thu May 12, 2016, 05:42 PM

137. I don't give a crap if there is or not, 'I', as a tax-paying citizen want to know! nt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to polly7 (Reply #137)

Thu May 12, 2016, 05:46 PM

139. Do you pay taxes in the U.S. ?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to COLGATE4 (Reply #139)

Thu May 12, 2016, 05:47 PM

140. She gave these speeches up here - all over the place. nt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to polly7 (Reply #140)

Thu May 12, 2016, 05:48 PM

141. Thanks. I was aware of that. Now, as I mentioned

before, do you pay taxes in the U.S. ?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to COLGATE4 (Reply #141)

Thu May 12, 2016, 05:49 PM

142. Do you pay taxes in Canada? nt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to polly7 (Reply #142)

Thu May 12, 2016, 05:51 PM

144. No, since I'm neither a Canadian citizen nor do any business in Canada.

Do you pay taxes in the U.S,?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to COLGATE4 (Reply #144)

Thu May 12, 2016, 05:52 PM

145. No, I don't.

Why do you believe I have no right to know who and what affects what goes on up here?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to polly7 (Reply #145)

Thu May 12, 2016, 05:55 PM

146. You may believe you have a 'right to know'. What do you not have is

the right to demand from a country's internal political system where you are neither a citizen nor taxpayer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to COLGATE4 (Reply #146)

Thu May 12, 2016, 06:01 PM

147. I have an absolute right to know, regardless of WHERE that person is from.

She's not so special that I don't get to know how she's affecting decisions wrt pipelines that cross our land also. Every other speech she gave schooling us on 'terra' was reported on - issues that affect the environment and that so many Canadians have protested, including those indigenous people whose lands are affected by all of these pipelines, should be suddenly secret. Bullfuckingshit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to polly7 (Reply #147)

Thu May 12, 2016, 06:35 PM

150. Only in your own mind. You have every right to demand things

from your own government and/or political party. I, as a non-citizen and non-taxpayer would not. The reverse is also true. None of our Presidential candidates owes you any explanation or justification nor do you have any right (except an imaginary one) to demand it. You are attempting to insert yourself into a process where you are merely a bystander.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to COLGATE4 (Reply #150)

Thu May 12, 2016, 06:44 PM

153. Mine and many others' minds. Only in your mind is it given that we

have no right to know.


Good luck with that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to polly7 (Reply #153)

Thu May 12, 2016, 07:02 PM

154. I said you have no right to demand. (Your words)

Obviously there must be some legislation somewhere which supports your contention. Do you also believe that you have a right to vote in our primary elections?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to COLGATE4 (Reply #154)

Thu May 12, 2016, 07:05 PM

155. I demand? My words??? - where exactly did I use the word 'demand'?

Why would I believe I have a right to vote there?

You seem to be making shit up from nothing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to COLGATE4 (Reply #66)

Thu May 19, 2016, 10:09 PM

240. Uh, we all deserve to see the speeches because maybe she's hiding something she doesnt want u to see

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pinskinny (Reply #240)

Thu May 19, 2016, 10:21 PM

241. Really?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to COLGATE4 (Reply #241)

Thu May 19, 2016, 10:28 PM

242. Considering her track record, yes really!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pinskinny (Reply #242)

Thu May 19, 2016, 10:37 PM

243. I was commenting on the depth and sophistication

of the phrasing of your question.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to COLGATE4 (Reply #243)

Thu May 19, 2016, 10:42 PM

244. Seems like you need it plain and simple since you are having difficulties seeing the problem

 

So that is where I left it!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pinskinny (Reply #244)

Thu May 19, 2016, 10:46 PM

245. Most of us have gotten past using 5th Grade logic

when discussing serious issues but you keep on keeping it "plain and simple". Obviously works for you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to COLGATE4 (Reply #245)

Thu May 19, 2016, 10:52 PM

247. Over analyzation has clouded your brain.

 

But keep on trying to justify your thoughts even though the simple facts stair you straight in the face.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pinskinny (Reply #247)

Fri May 20, 2016, 08:13 AM

252. Simple facts like the word you want is "stare", not "stair"?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to COLGATE4 (Reply #252)


Response to coffeeAM (Original post)

Thu May 12, 2016, 09:19 AM

19. Never, because there's only one transcript.

Slightly modified for each audience, I'd bet.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JustABozoOnThisBus (Reply #19)

Thu May 12, 2016, 09:44 AM

35. I'd say you just hit the nail on the head.

 

Obviously Bernie, and his supporters, are not aware that groups, organizations, and companies will hire speakers for events and meetings. Rarely do they ever speak about the business of those groups, organizations, or companies. They are hired to speak about their life experiences. The more interesting those experiences, the more they are paid. I've been fortunate to hear a lot of interesting paid speakers over the years. None ever spoke about the functions of those groups they were addressing. So yes, it is the same speech, with a little ad lib tossed in.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Original post)

Thu May 12, 2016, 09:27 AM

23. Gotta love the suspension of morality...

By Hillary supporters regarding this. I have a feeling Trump has something in his back pocket on this for a nice October Surprise.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Darkhawk32 (Reply #23)

Thu May 12, 2016, 10:09 AM

39. That is what I am thinking and fear.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Reply #39)

Thu May 12, 2016, 11:15 AM

63. Sure you do.

Suuuuure.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Original post)

Thu May 12, 2016, 09:37 AM

26. What if there ARE NO TRANSCRIPTS?

No "speeches" - just a wink, nod and a bribe? Poor Hillary, there's nothing to produce, just maybe?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Merryland (Reply #26)

Thu May 12, 2016, 11:20 AM

67. That must be it. As a matter of fact, I think I read that

over at Free Republic.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Merryland (Reply #26)

Thu May 12, 2016, 12:07 PM

74. True so many people would have attended

 

There would be thousands of people out there who have listened to her speeches and not one of them has come forward yet? It is odd.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lindsixo (Reply #74)


Response to coffeeAM (Original post)

Thu May 12, 2016, 09:38 AM

27. never

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Original post)

Thu May 12, 2016, 09:43 AM

31. she is a fool if she thinks they will not get leaked

Release them now and get out in front of it, or this may be the October surprise. If leaked at the prefect moment this could make Trump President

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to krawhitham (Reply #31)

Thu May 12, 2016, 10:36 AM

57. Its likely there are no transcripts.

Maybe you imagine that printed transcripts of her speaking engagements were handed out to the audience? Since she was speaking as a private citizen, her notes, drafts, outlines, and any texts would have come from her personal computer or her private office, so you're envisioning a fantasy that someone on her staff is a Bernie mole who would have unlimited access to her IT systems, steal her speeches, risking criminal charges for the theft of Clinton's intellectual property, and face a lawsuit for violating any non disclosure agreements?

Like many public speakers, Hillary often gives extemporaneous talks, in which case there is nothing in writing. Or she only uses a general outline of the key topics she wants to highlight. How is that so important that someone is going to risk their career to leak it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to procon (Reply #57)

Thu May 12, 2016, 11:22 AM

68. I believe you are right on.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Original post)

Thu May 12, 2016, 09:44 AM

33. Never. Hillary Clinton has cornered herself into a lose-lose regards the transcripts.

If the transcripts make Hillary Clinton look good, they would have been released long ago.

It is ludicrous to believe that the sums of monies taken from such economically powerful institutions would not effect past and subsequent acts by Clinton.

Bad for the Democratic party.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PufPuf23 (Reply #33)

Thu May 12, 2016, 10:08 AM

38. Bingo!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PufPuf23 (Reply #33)

Thu May 12, 2016, 04:59 PM

131. yep

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Original post)

Thu May 12, 2016, 09:46 AM

36. When is someone going to come up with a valid reason for her releasing them? How do you know.....

....if there even are "transcripts" of any speeches she gave as a private citizen?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Original post)

Thu May 12, 2016, 09:51 AM

37. The day after Sanders releases his tax-returns. Bazinga!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DetlefK (Reply #37)

Thu May 12, 2016, 02:14 PM

95. He did already. Bazinga!

And damn you for making me say "Bazinga!"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Original post)

Thu May 12, 2016, 10:11 AM

40. You have no right to see her transcripts. You'll need to look elsewhere for your ammo

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ohioblue22 (Reply #40)

Thu May 12, 2016, 10:13 AM

43. She is Running for president of the United States, we the tax payers have every right!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Reply #43)

Thu May 12, 2016, 11:22 AM

69. Says you. Not convincing authority.

"But I want it!!!!!"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to COLGATE4 (Reply #69)

Thu May 12, 2016, 11:53 AM

72. We the tax payers, not me the tax payer.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Reply #72)

Thu May 12, 2016, 11:53 AM

73. Did I miss the memo where you were designated spokesperson

for all the tax payers?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Reply #43)

Thu May 12, 2016, 12:41 PM

82. You are wrong

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ohioblue22 (Reply #82)

Thu May 12, 2016, 01:25 PM

91. ?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ohioblue22 (Reply #40)

Thu May 12, 2016, 03:01 PM

111. Did Nixon have a right to keep his transcripts secret? n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lumberjack_jeff (Reply #111)

Thu May 12, 2016, 04:35 PM

121. Nixon lol. You have zero rights to those transcripts

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Original post)

Thu May 12, 2016, 10:13 AM

41. Hillary must release her Wall Street transcripts, so says another Bernie fan.

No, she doesn't. This is your issue, the guileless Bernie fan club thinks this is their ticket to an easy victory, but no one cares. Here's a shocker; Hillary's speechifying was probably probably pretty anodyne and saccharinely polite to her audience -- at the very least, $225,000 would get them some pleasant sounding words -- but that’s likely about the extent of it.


Mrs. Clinton mainly offered what one attendee called “a tour of the world,” covering her observations on China, Iran, Egypt and Russia. This person said Mrs. Clinton also discussed the dysfunction in Washington, how to repair America’s standing in the world after the government shutdown and also talked a bit about the Affordable Care Act, which had had a difficult rollout.

http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2016/02/05/hillary-clintons-campaign-resists-releasing-transcripts-from-goldman-speeches/




Yeah, sounds real devastating to Hillary's campaign.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Original post)

Thu May 12, 2016, 10:29 AM

51. She'll do it before I vote for her, that's all I know. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Original post)

Thu May 12, 2016, 10:32 AM

52. not even a good try. The Democratic Party doesn't give a shit about her transcripts.

Here 6 days and already stirring shit. Enjoy your stay.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Original post)

Thu May 12, 2016, 10:32 AM

53. Trump probably already has the transcripts, OCTOBER SURPRISE?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Original post)

Thu May 12, 2016, 10:33 AM

54. In the general election when she is looking to attract certain Republicans.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skwmom (Reply #54)

Thu May 12, 2016, 10:37 AM

58. That could very well be it! +1

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to B Calm (Reply #58)

Thu May 12, 2016, 11:24 AM

70. Yep. Hang on to that (new) false hope. It'll keep you warm,

at least until she's elected President.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Original post)

Thu May 12, 2016, 10:37 AM

59. You'll read them in her presidential library

 

Along with an explanatory text of why the 2016 election was a turning point in favor of the lovely oligarchy Panem that you and your grandchildren know and love.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Original post)

Thu May 12, 2016, 12:22 PM

76. when Satan purchases a snowmobile.

I have a better chance of seeing Bigfoot.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Original post)

Thu May 12, 2016, 12:25 PM

78. Hillary is cooked

 

Hillary has an honesty problem, you are assuming the speech money was for an actual speech.

For argument's sake, let's assume a real speech was given. All Trump has to do is offer a reward for it. He will get it in no time and use it to bash the democratic party along with Hillary. Trump already has plenty of material to use against Hillary. She has a metric ton of baggage. All done while painting himself as an outsider populist. The corporate media will help him win.

Let's hope Bernie wins so we can avoid the embarrassment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Rass (Reply #78)

Thu May 12, 2016, 12:41 PM

81. Thus Far

Primary Elections Popular Vote as of May 12, 2016
Hillary Clinton: 12,647,581
Bernie Sanders: 9,570,415

Contests Won
Clinton: 26
Sanders: 20

Pledged Delegates
Clinton: 1717
Sandeds: 1437

Superdelegate Endorsements
Clinton: 503
Sanders: 41

Total Delegate Support
Clinton: 2220 of 2384 required (93%)
Sanders: 1478 of 2384 required (62%)
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_presidential_primaries,_2016

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jamese777 (Reply #81)

Thu May 12, 2016, 12:49 PM

84. Nearly 10 million dems say IM NOT WITH HER after the establishement rolled out the red carpet 4 her

 

and the media has done everything imaginable to bury the Sanders movement. What does that tell ya?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Reply #84)

Fri May 13, 2016, 09:13 AM

163. That nearly 13 million DEMOCRATS have said "I'm with her" tells me HRC will be the nominee.

In addition there is the disturbing fact that some of those 10 million votes BS had gotten are from Republicans who would not vote for him in the GE.

Trump voters boost Sanders in West Virginia
05/10/16 09:30 PM—UPDATED 05/11/16 08:00 PM
By Alex Seitz-Wald

>>>snip<<<

Unfortunately there has been a trend of Republican voters casting their votes for Bernie Sanders.

In fact, 39 percent of Sanders voters said they would vote for Trump over Sanders in the fall. For Clinton, nine percent of her voters say they plan to come out for Trump in the general election.

West Virginia has an open primary, meaning independents can vote in the Democratic contest. With the GOP nomination wrapped up, it’s possible mischievous Trump supporters sought to damage Clinton, the likely Democratic nominee, by voting for Sanders.

There was also a competitive Democratic gubernatorial primary Tuesday – and no Republican one – so Trump voters might have turned out for that and then weighed in on the presidential ballot line while they were at it.

Either way, Sanders’ coalition in West Virginia doesn’t fit with many of the patterns we’ve come to expect of Sanders voters after more than 40 primaries and caucuses.

For instance, Sanders, the Vermont Democratic Socialist, won self-described conservative voters. He also won 62 percent of voters who said they want less liberal policies than Obama’s.

That suggests some of Sanders’ voters may have been motivated more by a desire to vote against Clinton, rather than to support Sanders’ policy ideas.


More>>>>

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/trump-voters-boost-sanders-west-virginia

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Reply #84)

Sat May 14, 2016, 01:08 PM

196. and suppressing votes too dont forget.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Reply #84)

Tue May 17, 2016, 05:29 PM

222. +100

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jamese777 (Reply #81)

Thu May 12, 2016, 01:14 PM

90. Superdelegates have not voted yet

 

Nice of you to inflate her numbers. I wouldn't be surprised if Bernie wins the remaining states since corporate media suppression tactics don't last long term. We are taking it all the way to the convention.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Original post)

Thu May 12, 2016, 12:54 PM

87. Don't hold your breath!

The only people clamoring for her speeches she made as a CITIZEN are the Bernie supporters. This is an intrusion on her private life, painting it any other way is nonsense. She is doing the right thing by holding the line on over intrusiveness.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BootinUp (Reply #87)

Thu May 12, 2016, 03:28 PM

114. Its part of the vetting process and that involves looking into any possible scandal.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Original post)

Thu May 12, 2016, 12:55 PM

88. The Republicans will release them once it's too late

for even the Neo-Dem machine to do anything about it.

She is having yet another laps in judgment right now by not releasing them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Original post)


Response to rjsquirrel (Reply #89)

Thu May 12, 2016, 02:01 PM

92. She is dragging the party through the mud and making it look bad, that is the reason!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Reply #92)

Thu May 12, 2016, 02:37 PM

101. yes and we're constantly hearing about how Hillary is vetted and Bernie is not.

 

And meanwhile there's those transcripts floating around. It's unbelievable.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lindsixo (Reply #101)

Thu May 12, 2016, 03:29 PM

115. NOBODY cares!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #115)

Thu May 12, 2016, 04:42 PM

124. Yup, nothing to see here, just move along folks!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Reply #92)


Response to coffeeAM (Reply #92)

Thu May 12, 2016, 02:42 PM

103. I don't understand what you mean

Please explain how "Hillary is dragging the party through the mud and making it look bad".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Original post)

Thu May 12, 2016, 03:00 PM

109. Not except in response to a congressional subpoena.

 

But that won't matter because audio of one of the events will be a Republican campaign commercial.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Original post)

Thu May 12, 2016, 04:48 PM

127. Never. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Original post)

Thu May 12, 2016, 04:56 PM

129. How about never??? Does never work for you???

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gomez163 (Reply #129)

Thu May 12, 2016, 05:45 PM

138. No it does not and it should not work for anyone that values transparency!!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Reply #138)

Thu May 12, 2016, 05:50 PM

143. She doesnt have to. Bernie is TOAST.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gomez163 (Reply #143)

Thu May 12, 2016, 06:28 PM

149. She doesnt have to, butshe is making the party look bad by not doing it!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Original post)

Thu May 12, 2016, 04:56 PM

130. I see the goal posts are moving yet again, even in this thread. The

 

answer is: never. She never intended to, and never will. What does that make her?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to silvershadow (Reply #130)

Fri May 13, 2016, 08:59 AM

162. the "we cant" campaign becomes "we wont"

 

alleged democracy minded voters shrug.
real ones shudder.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Original post)

Thu May 12, 2016, 06:13 PM

148. they could be a USEFUL weapon for the RIGHT wing in oct. what is she afraid of?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Original post)

Thu May 12, 2016, 06:39 PM

151. I saw them, I have a friend who knows the organizer. She said Wall Street folks arent evil

So, you gonna vote for Trump now?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackie Wilson Said (Reply #151)

Thu May 19, 2016, 10:56 PM

249. You "saw them", did you?

Are we all on "Double Secret Probation", and you're not giving it up like Dean Werner?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Original post)

Thu May 12, 2016, 06:41 PM

152. Never, nor does she need to.

Nor will she ever shrink from attacks whether from Trump (expected) or from fellow "Democrats" (unexpected and getting more and more desperate by the day).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Original post)

Fri May 13, 2016, 08:17 AM

158. Does she really need to?

I think most people have their minds made up already.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Original post)

Fri May 13, 2016, 04:33 PM

175. There are now stories popping up about the gop looking for them. Which I'm sure they are.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lindsixo (Reply #175)

Fri May 13, 2016, 04:54 PM

183. What stories?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Reply #183)

Fri May 13, 2016, 05:01 PM

184. I saw this video.

 



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lindsixo (Reply #184)

Fri May 13, 2016, 05:11 PM

185. This guy is saying exactly what is gonna happen, the dems need to open their freakin eyes!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lindsixo (Reply #184)

Fri May 13, 2016, 09:31 PM

191. Do you mind if I put thid video in the main body of the post?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Reply #191)

Sat May 14, 2016, 11:47 AM

193. Not at all. I'm just passing it along.

 

and the more people that see it the better.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lindsixo (Reply #193)

Sat May 14, 2016, 12:34 PM

194. Thank you, I just have to figure out how to do it..

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Reply #194)

Sun May 15, 2016, 03:54 AM

204. You did it.

You just have to post the YouTube link and it shows up. DU is very YouTube friendly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Original post)

Fri May 13, 2016, 04:39 PM

177. I would say the day after Hell freezes over. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Original post)

Fri May 13, 2016, 04:40 PM

178. Still waiting for the transcripts of Sanders and conversations he has had with NRA, GE,

Lockheed Martin. We know he was influenced by NRA, and with continuation of funding to Lockheed Martin for the F-35 program, wonder what else we will find.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Thinkingabout (Reply #178)

Fri May 13, 2016, 05:27 PM

186. So your basically saying Clinton will be influenced by wall street?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Reply #186)

Fri May 13, 2016, 07:31 PM

188. Never said that, i know Sanders has been influenced, Sanders and others has not

Produced a relationship where Hillary was influenced.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Thinkingabout (Reply #188)

Fri May 13, 2016, 08:56 PM

189. ya im sure they just give 15 million away for the hell of it.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Thinkingabout (Reply #188)

Sat May 14, 2016, 02:30 PM

198. Sanders has been influenced? In what alternate universe?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Reply #198)

Sat May 14, 2016, 02:52 PM

200. As in voting five times against the Brady Bill after the NRA donated $18,000

To defeat his opponent when he was elected to Congress.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Thinkingabout (Reply #200)

Sat May 14, 2016, 03:35 PM

203. Excellent vote by him considering what was attached to those bills by the establishment!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Thinkingabout (Reply #178)

Fri May 13, 2016, 06:02 PM

187. We dont know anything of the sort.

 

The difference is that he does not say one thing to one audience and then completely change position for a different audience. He has already taken the heat for his position on guns and not tried to backtrack unlike what Clinton does all the time. So no one is going to be ever be surprised by something he has said.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Thinkingabout (Reply #178)

Thu May 19, 2016, 10:54 PM

248. Yes... That's why he rated a "D-" from the NRA...

Next myth?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Original post)

Fri May 13, 2016, 04:41 PM

180. After Romney's 47% taped remarks, I suspect

some GOP folks at Goldman Sachs or one of those Wall Street speaking engagements had some way of recording her.

They're just waiting for the right moment like the folks who released Romney's 47% remarks did.

Things like this seem to have a way of getting out.

The GOP obviously know if she's not releasing them, that they're damaging politically.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Original post)

Fri May 13, 2016, 04:53 PM

182. People keep thinking...

That this issue of her transcripts is a RW talking point but it is not. Had 2008 not happend maybe that is all it would be but 2008 did happen and many thousands if not millions of people's lives were turned upside down because of the fraud done and then to add insult to injury those same people were forced to bail out the very bankers that created the mess. One of my biggest disappointments with President Obama was he side step of holding Wall Street accountable for its actions.

So what HRC said to bankers is important to many people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Original post)

Fri May 13, 2016, 09:02 PM

190. never!

 

Kabesh!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Original post)

Sat May 14, 2016, 02:32 PM

199. When the price is right.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Original post)

Sat May 14, 2016, 03:33 PM

202. Transcripts, schmanscripts...

 

I'm with HER!!

[link:|

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NewImproved Deal (Reply #202)

Sun May 15, 2016, 11:44 PM

205. with Wall street?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Original post)

Sun May 15, 2016, 11:46 PM

207. If I had to guess, late June, and they'll be boring as hell

But they definitely kept you guys distracted for a few months.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Original post)


Response to coffeeAM (Original post)

Tue May 17, 2016, 05:42 PM

225. I think she will release them next month.

 

I think she is just waiting for things to calm down.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to spinboas (Reply #225)

Thu May 19, 2016, 08:20 AM

229. What has given you that idea?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Original post)

Thu May 19, 2016, 07:49 AM

228. not happening

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Original post)

Thu May 19, 2016, 09:50 PM

238. why would she show the world the favors she owes wall street?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Original post)

Thu May 19, 2016, 10:51 PM

246. She knows she would look terrible so she's weighed the risk and decided not to.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Logical (Reply #246)

Fri May 20, 2016, 07:20 AM

250. Ya but she looks like she is lying by not releasing them.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pinskinny (Reply #250)

Fri May 20, 2016, 07:20 AM

251. I 100% agree.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pinskinny (Reply #250)

Sat May 21, 2016, 09:33 AM

256. Yes she does!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coffeeAM (Original post)

Fri May 20, 2016, 04:30 PM

255. K & R

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread