New York Times: Release the transcripts

[jhart3333]

(from CNN) - The New York Times editorial board, a body that endorsed Hillary Clinton earlier this year, on Thursday called on the presidential candidate to release transcripts from her paid speeches to Wall Street and banking groups.

...

"Voters have every right to know what Mrs. Clinton told these groups," writes the editorial board. "By refusing to release them all, especially the bank speeches, Mrs. Clinton fuels speculation about why she's stonewalling."

The board adds, "Public interest in these speeches is legitimate, and it is the public -- not the candidate -- who decides how much disclosure is enough. By stonewalling on these transcripts Mrs. Clinton plays into the hands of those who say she's not trustworthy and makes her own rules. Most important, she is damaging her credibility among Democrats who are begging her to show them that she'd run an accountable and transparent White House."

Hillary, release those transcripts!

[kgnu_fan]

1. K&R

[Duckhunter935]

2. I hope she looks into it

[artislife]

3. Perfect storm brewing

transcripts, new email seriousness and stupid reaction to two quiet protesters. They didn't like her, but they were ANGRY. Not as angry as some of the people I have met. They really would love to give a what what to the Clintons.

[Katashi_itto]

4. K&R! Down with 3rd Way, the Vichy Dems

[oldandhappy]

5. I am confused.

The people who paid for the speeches should own the transcripts as far as I know. Why are we asking Clinton to release the speeches? She sold them. The Wall Street folk should be the target of the transcript requests. Yes? No? I am willing to learn.

[jhart3333]

6. My understanding is that Hillary was the only one allowed to transcribe the speech.

No one else was allowed to. Part of the agreement.

[oldandhappy]

7. OK got it -- control!