Who Impugns Hillary’s Integrity?

[JRLeft]

At the last Democratic debate, Hillary Clinton inadvertently sparked a firestorm when she invoked her woman donors and 9/11 as a defense to Bernie Sanders calling out her Wall Street donors. As Molly Ball tweeted,playing both the women’s card and the 9/11 card in one answer revealed just how sensitive Clinton was to the self-evident line of attack.

Clinton began her response characteristically by attacking Sanders for trying to “impugn my integrity.” To recall, Sanders had asked a simple but telling question: “Why… over her political career has Wall Street [been] a major– the major– campaign contributor to Hillary Clinton? You know, maybe they’re dumb and they don’t know what they’re gonna get. But I don’t think so…

He elaborated: “I have never heard a candidate, never, who’s received huge amounts of money from oil, from coal, from Wall Street, from the military industrial complex, not one candidate, go, “Oh, these– these campaign contributions will not influence me. I’m gonna be independent.” Now, why do they make millions of dollars of campaign contributions? They expect to get something. Everybody knows that. Once again, I am running a campaign differently than any other candidate. We are relying on small campaign donors, [750,000] and $30 apiece. That’s who I’m indebted to.”

Hillary then demanded time to respond, charging Sanders with trying to “impugn my integrity, let’s be frank here.” She then went on to say that she was proud that most of her donors were “small,” and “a majority of my donors are women…And I represented New York on 9/11 when we were attacked,” and spent a lot of time helping Wall Street rebuild.

https://ourfuture.org/20151123/who-impugns-hillarys-integrity

[daleanime]

1. Well, to be truthful.....

Hillary usually does a pretty good job of it herself.

[JRLeft]

2. Her supporters truly believe she can take money from industries and not be corrupted

LMFAO

[kath]

3. What integrity?????

[Fumesucker]

4. Stays bought?

[JRLeft]

5. It left with dodging sniper fire.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

8. On a wing and a prayer...

[bvf]

7. Consistently changing her views.

That weathervane requires lots of grease to stay in operation.

[Scuba]

23. Bingo!

[catnhatnh]

6. From the article

" In 2013 alone, Hillary made over $3 million personally from giving speeches to various Wall Street forums. Wall Street banks and investment houses made up a third of her total speech income, while providing some $17 million in campaign contributions over the years."

"As one Wall Street lawyer put it, “If it turns out to be Jeb vs. Hillary, we would love that and either outcome would be fine.”

"They are sophisticated, cynical and paying attention. And they are confident her new-found populism is a campaign posture, not a real position."

Love it-they are so certain her campaign promises are lies they gave her $17 million...

[malokvale77]

9. Integrity?

and spent a lot of time helping Wall Street rebuild.

That line always makes me laugh.

[JRLeft]

11. They were her constituents, remember she said it. She represented them.

[azmom]

10. How could he impugn something that

Doesn't exist?

[Ford_Prefect]

12. What you said! "Oh, how can you be in 2 places at once, when you're not anywhere at all?"

[onecaliberal]

13. Assumes facts not in evidence, suggesting integrity to begin with.

[gordyfl]

14. Campaign Money Influences Politicians

Everybody knows that.

[ConservativeDemocrat]

15. Man, you guys

Just about every international terrorist attack in 2015 (jan-june, july-dec) is done by Muslims, and you rightfully say all Muslims aren't responsible.

But apparently Wall Street - which is a physical street, not even a firm - is like Mordor or something. All-encompassing evil, driven by a single unified evil... dun dun dunnnnnn.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

/ You know how I know you people have no clue about how financial reporting of political contributions is done in the U.S.?

[Betty Karlson]

18. Terrorist attacks?

You mean like in Oregon right now? Or when the police force extrajudicially kills people of colour? Or when drone strikes kill civilians?

It's very convenient that only crimes committed by self-identified Muslims are designated terrorism: otherwise you wouldn't be able to claim that terrorism is committed exclusively by Muslims.

[leftofcool]

20. His post went right over your head

[Kalidurga]

19. But apparently Wall Street-which is a physical street, not even a firm - is like Mordor or something

wow knee deep in the truth and you still don't see it. That is very interesting.

[Fumesucker]

21. When I hear the thunder of many hooves I think horses, not zebras

We know people don't give that kind of money away with no strings even if those strings may only be implicit. We have to work too hard for meager rations to not know full well the value of a dollar let alone millions of them, we know how our lives could be transformed by that kind of money. Some of us have read the classics and know the ancients understood human nature as well or better than we do, quite possibly better since they had fewer electronic distractions. Aesop's Fables are about human failings and foibles.

People are flawed and people who gravitate toward power and influence over practically everything else tend to have particular flaws. It's not so much that power corrupts as it's irresistibly attractive to the corruptible. One of my kids happened to marry into a minor political family in our then local area and it was quite the eye opener for me the perks that come with even low level political connections.

[ConservativeDemocrat]

24. That kind of money is limited to $2300 per person

Not to put too fine a point on it, but that's less than two weeks rent in Manhattan.

When you read "Firm donated <X> to a candidate's campaign", read that as "Of the Firm's 50000 employees, about 3% of them donated money to the candidate they liked, in aggregate totaling <X>". Read this way, you suddenly understand that the money being raised is not much at all.

This is also how so many firms are listed as donating money to both candidates. The Democrats are donating to the democratic candidate, while the Republicans are donating to the Republican one.

Citizens United made it legal for people to spend unlimited amounts of their own money on independent expenditures. So, while you can buy yourself a sign for Sanders to put on your front lawn, some billionaire (were he so inclined) could buy millions of them and pay to put them up everywhere legal. Both are now considered Free Speech.

But that has nothing to do with candidate fundraising. At all.

It remains completely illegal for corporations or unions to donate out of their general operating funds to any candidate.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

[cali]

22. Here, let me help you. Wall Street is shorthand for the large financial institutions

responsible for economic devastation. And terrorist attacks have nothing to do with that.

[Betty Karlson]

16. Her record is impugning her! Shame on her record. Let's be frank here. eom

[billhicks76]

17. Hillary Doesn't Know The Meaning Of The Word