2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: The whole point of getting Hillary's transcripts . . . [View all]Ford_Prefect
(7,897 posts)If that were true the GOP would have already done it through their well known connections to the same industrial clients.
It is NOT and never was about what she does as a private citizen. It's about what she has said to those same audiences since announcing for the POTUS. Why has no one present at those events related her remarks in an interview? Why can no one discuss the details of what was said? Why do we "little people"deserve one version of HRC when the big donors are clearly getting another version?
Did David Brock throw a hissy fit over the idea that there is anything in those speeches that could damage HRC?
Were you present at any of those speeches? Do you know what was said? Do you have a friend who told you the content? Do you have a personal line in disinformation for David Brock? I assume for the moment that the answer is no and you speak as an interested voter rather than a party shill. Fair enough.
I accept that Hillary Clinton has been for some time the target of well funded, foul and misogynistic personal attacks by the GOP propaganda machine.
I have been a registered Democrat since Nixon lied his way into office. I am a former union member, and a former technician whose career was off-shored. I have reasons to ask what was said and deserve answers. If HRC cannot answer them I have no reason to trust that she will act in my behalf. I cannot guarantee her attention to my needs since I cannot afford to donate $500,000 or more to the PACs or the Clinton Foundation. I only have the one vote.
I would like to be persuaded that trusting HRC is worth that vote. So far I see little to encourage that proposal.