Clinton Deflects Calls To Release Wall St. Speech Transcripts
Source: Reuters
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton defended her paid speeches to Wall Street, saying in an interview that aired on Friday that they would not soften her campaign pledges for tougher regulation.
The former U.S. Senator from New York and secretary of state is under pressure from rival candidate Bernie Sanders, who has made her Wall Street ties a top campaign issue and called for her to release transcripts of her remarks. Clinton was reportedly paid millions in appearance fees after leaving the State Department.
Asked whether she could assure U.S. voters that the speeches would not undermine her calls to rein in the financial industry, Clinton told MSNBC: "Absolutely."
"I'm on the public record. I told them what I'm going to do. I said I'm going to go after big banks that pose a systemic risk. I want you to hold me accountable for that because I will do that exactly," she told the network's "Morning Joe" program.
Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/clinton-deflects-calls-release-wall-st-speech-transcripts-164941969--sector.html
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
fbc
(1,668 posts)Did she lie to the banking executives in her speeches?
Or is she lying to voters now?
Obviously the speeches don't match her current pledges or she would release them. So who is she lying to? Us or them?
How can onyone trust this Lady.
dchill
(38,505 posts)'Cause where are the transcripts?
From the few tidbits that people have talked about, she is lying to us.
riversedge
(70,245 posts)Kall
(615 posts)to have doubts about the truthfulness and integrity of the war hero who fictitiously braved the mortal perils of Bosnian sniper fire?
closeupready
(29,503 posts)But her supporters tell us everyone else does it, too, so it's okay! Go, Hillary! 
Buzz Clik
(38,437 posts)Well, assuming his life started 10 seconds ago.
Oops. He just spoke.
5 seconds ago.
Gary 50
(381 posts)Clearly he is the most honest politician since Jimmy Carter. Hillary is closer to the Ted Cruz level liar.
Buzz Clik
(38,437 posts)... that Sanders compares well to Carter in that regard.
I find Sanders disingenuous at best.
Buzz Clik
(38,437 posts)Cartaphelius
(868 posts)Last edited Fri Feb 26, 2016, 07:18 PM - Edit history (1)
Hillary, the Grand Dame of the Third Way, is not a progressive. Never has been, never will.
Instead she, like The Donald, represents the status quo, and are both opportunists. To prove this
all we need do is look to the previous forty years. "Efforts" to "raise-all-boats", as Hillary as claims,
assumes the 99% can afford boats. Overall, the reduction in incomes, the selling off of the commons
the people paid for, bail-outs and corporate welfare, obscene levels of fraud, waste, and abuse,
endured and paid for by the 99%, shows precisely the impact in all her efforts to "serve we the people".
Oddly, in all that has happened to the 99% I'll bet there hasn't been a moment where Hillary or the rest
of her ilk, has wondered where or when their next meal will come from, having a warm, a safe place to
sleep, or having myriad sources of income to ensure her chauffeur, cook, housekeeper, accountant and
attorney maintain the lifestyle they have all become accustom to.
How can she know the pain of the 99%? She hasn't lived it in the last 40 years, at least.
Intellectual acknowledgment of the suffering foisted upon the 99% is her most obvious lie to date.
I'm not bitter. Somehow I'll survive the disenfranchisement of the working poor by those feckless go-along-to-get-along, status quo pretenders over the past 40 plus years.
Far too many have not and too many more will not.
Go Bernie!
Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)You were on public record opposing various trade deals, yet you secretly lobbied for them. So, you will pardon me if your word is not good enough.
datguy_6
(176 posts)Even if it's nothing, the optics look bad and only further adds to the "untrustful" and "dishonest" meme that the RW is pushing...
navarth
(5,927 posts)to tell us it's like benghazi.
Purveyor
(29,876 posts)
xocet
(3,871 posts)
Qutzupalotl
(14,317 posts)VAWA is irrelevant, Bernie was really voting for the crime bill he opposed.
Satch59
(1,353 posts)If she doesn't release them, she's a liar and hiding stuff...if she releases them, there will be things taken out of context and screamed across headlines...just another attempt to "get her" so I'm ok with her holding her ground. Feels like bullying.
Flame away... 
Herman4747
(1,825 posts)...when politicians make any speeches, but does that mean that politicians should never make speeches?
KPN
(15,646 posts)but she put herself there ... and it's a really good reason to "get her" as you say. I honestly don't think Hillary has a chance of winning the GE. She's toast.
pdsimdars
(6,007 posts)nothing need be taken out of context in her transcript. It will be painfully obvious what she intended to say.
JustABozoOnThisBus
(23,352 posts)The context of addressing Wall Street executives, and accepting large fees for, well, her entertainment value perhaps? That context?
She can only wish we take the speeches out of their context. The context is bad enough on its own.
INdemo
(6,994 posts)Last edited Fri Feb 26, 2016, 03:16 PM - Edit history (1)
What about the bankruptcy bill? What did she say to Wall St..She She went to NASDAQ,they have nothing to do with banks.
Hillary you are lying
she said "look at my record"..well her record shows she is a Golden Girl..GoldmanSachs/Big Banks puppet
she lied about NAFTA,the TPP,The Keystone Pipeline and accepted speaking fee from a Major Canandian bank that
is financing part of the Keystone...
pdsimdars
(6,007 posts)
peacebird
(14,195 posts)xocet
(3,871 posts)she is expressing support for transparency and accountability to those who are not paying attention.
Her true sentiment seems to be: "I want you to hold me accountable for that...(after you have voted for me and therefore have no immediate power to hold me accountable)."
Arizona Roadrunner
(168 posts)Can Goldman-Sachs Tax deduct the $650.000 Paid Hillary Clinton for her "speeches"? If so, then it means we are subsidizing said "speeches" by having to pay more taxes to offset the taxes lost by said deduction. We could also lose services because they don't have the revenues due to said loss of revenue. Therefore, we have standing in asking for her to release the speeches so we can see what was generated for said tax deduction.
sarge43
(28,941 posts)Death, taxes and Hillary Clinton will change her story.
KPN
(15,646 posts)She learned from the master didn't she? (An aside on the upside, since he held the office anyway, I always delighted in how Bill nuanced the Rs into corners). Sounds to me like she'd go after them AFTER we bail them out again!
davidthegnome
(2,983 posts)I have to wonder how this all works. It's not like when a corporation makes a campaign contribution they get the candidate to sign a contract or something. She can take their money and still go after the big banks.... the question is, will she?
Provided she wins the nomination and then the election, she will be running for a second term in four years, so she will likely, once again, need the financial support of organized crime... err, wall street, financial institutions, etc.
It comes down to a question of trust. Do we believe that, having taking money from these corporations, these groups, these individuals... do we believe that she will then side with the American people against them? Frankly, I don't think so. I suppose it's possible, but who wants to piss off the people that fund their careers?
Maybe I'm wrong, in my opinion though, she is far more a friend to Wall Street than to Main Street.
grasswire
(50,130 posts)By the time the Republicans get through with her, she will look like Ma Clampett.
Dustlawyer
(10,495 posts)Wall Street - "We are going to pay you over $100,000,000 in in speaking fees to move you and Bill straight to the 1%, plus load up your campaign and Super PACs with millions and millions of dollars. Next we will donate and get foreign companies to send hundreds of millions to the Clinton Global Initiative. Lastly, we will donate to many other politicians to get their endorsements and Super Delegate votes, and we almost forgot, we will donate to the congressional race where the spouse is a long standing MSNBC talking head with his own show so he and his network will also shill for you!"
"Oh yes we understand, you will have to say a few tough things about us publicly, and that all of this was just done out of the goodness of our hearts, or our mistaken belief that we bought you (wink wink)!"
Dems to Win
(2,161 posts)Not good enough!
I don't need to see the transcripts to know that I am not voting for someone who cashed in on her public service to the tune of $20million+. And her husband cashed in for 10 times that amount!
Free the Democrats from the Clintons!
William769
(55,147 posts)Pay no attention to the trouncing that isgoing to happen tomorrow then on Tuesday!
Kall
(615 posts)William769
(55,147 posts)
Kall
(615 posts)But I understand that does not compute with you, so you proceeded with a non sequitur and tried to start a pie fight. I'm not about to do that.
Gene Debs
(582 posts)
FailureToCommunicate
(14,014 posts)C Moon
(12,213 posts)pdsimdars
(6,007 posts)Did you see how easy it was for Bernie to release his transcript? One day Hillary said when he released his, she would. No problem, he just released it. It was simple and no big deal.
I didn't see him whining about "double standard" and "media picking on him". . . . you only have to make excuses when you have something to hide, something you don't want people to see.
I think she should be met at every event she holds, with signs asking her when she is going to release the transcript. She just CAN'T be transparent.
It was so easy for Bernie who has nothing to hide.
jalan48
(13,871 posts)But let's play pretend that she's looking out for the average person. Or pretend that her vote for the Iraq War was about WMDs or pretend that her serving on the Board of WalMart is what every good Democrat should do. Hillary is is the pretend candidate, it's not about issues, it's about pretending she really cares about us little people.
Mike Nelson
(9,960 posts)...I don't want to see them. I know she said complimentary things to those who paid her big fees. I figured this out all by myself. 
Geronimoe
(1,539 posts)If she released the transcripts, they would be on the record. You can't say you are on the record, when you don't release the record.
Argue as much as she will, she is simply digging herself a deeper hole.
Elmer S. E. Dump
(5,751 posts)pdsimdars
(6,007 posts)He said that they all talk about getting money out of politics because it corrupts. . . but it corrupts "THEM" not us because we know about it.
Oh yea, . . .like we don't get fat from eating ice cream because WE know it makes you fat.
houston16revival
(953 posts)have expended so much time and money in preparation for HRC as the Democratic nominee
that it would behoove Democrats to switch to someone else.
To wit, those operatives have been posting in online discussion forums for almost a year now
You can see the shills, lying, repeat posting
Are any of you here posting in discussion forums of newspapers in your state, or in states with
important and vulnerable GOP Senators seeking re-election? No?
No one changes any votes here, we're preaching to the choir.
Become active. Or volunteer with your county Democratic committee, or a campaign
for your candidate
Boots on the ground can sway an election
Get involved!
beac
(9,992 posts)Remember how well that worked out for him, Hillary?
As usual, she's made it worse for herself by stonewalling. This is getting much more attention that it would if she had just released the transcripts and let the chips fall where they may. Now, true or not, she's created the perception that the speeches contain a bombshell (or bombshells), so she's seeing the same level of outrage even without disclosing their contents.
Hulk
(6,699 posts)It's these types of word games that make even her own party mistrust her. I was a Hillary supporter at one time, and I could even have backed her if she won fair and square; but nearly every day I grow more doubtful of her integrity and honesty.
She has a real problem with being transparent, and when she finally relents and releases her past, the damage is already done.
I hope to hell its "Bernie versus tRump".
SoapBox
(18,791 posts)It sounds so Nixon...no tapes for you!
Magleetis
(1,260 posts)of the corrupt establishment. Plain and simple.
Buzz Clik
(38,437 posts)This is more ridiculous than the endless parade of Benghazi hearings.
hollowdweller
(4,229 posts)But we have to wait for her to win the general for that.
Skeeter Barnes
(994 posts)$12 per hour or less will have to do, for me and you! 
840high
(17,196 posts)retrowire
(10,345 posts)AzDar
(14,023 posts)She's a LIAR. Period. Her word is not to be trusted...
Lizzie Poppet
(10,164 posts)There's been more than enough time for her staff to concoct transcripts purged of anything damning.
Video, please...
EndElectoral
(4,213 posts)
catnhatnh
(8,976 posts)Laughing Mirror
(4,185 posts)Then turned quickly away because she couldn't answer. Laughing at people for asking her and running away from an answer is not going to help her.