n/t

"Honey, you gonna take out the garbage?!"
"I'll look into it".

Which means "I'm sick of talking to you. Goodbye."

ask for a pony for your fifth birthday. Except the transcripts are not impossible to provide and Hillary is not your abuela or your mamacita.

what I would like, and what we will 'never ever' get, are the discussions that happen behind closed doors before and after the speeches.

for things like Gramm, Leach Bliley, the Commodities Futures Modernization Act of 2000 and Poppy's NAFTA.

Here, we're told we can't associate Bill's administration with Hillary--except when she wants us to-- but maybe no one told Goldman Sachs that.

Besides, the Clintons did a lot toward having us associate both of them with Bill's administration.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12778412

There can be lots of reasons that could motivate that result.

I can't think of any one of them that says 'on average, not responding boosts my support with voters'.

The damage of not releasing them may not be much greater than admitting she and Bill made millions giving them and that damage is done.

The damage of releasing them, and only she knows, could be greater than the harm of not releasing them.

i.e. she sells her speeches, if she gave them away for free, no one would pay her supposedly.
anyway, you slice and dice it , I don't see this happening.

If something in them is going to be ruinous to Clinton's presidential ambitions, it will come out. Her audience was probably mostly right wingers. One of those audience members, or wait staff, or assistants may have made an unauthorized recording. All this publicity about those speeches is going to motivate someone to dig their recording out of a closet and offer it to the highest Republican bidder. They then will sit on it and, if she becomes the nominee, release it to the media where it will be played over and over, just like what happened with Romney. That will end Clinton's political life, the Democrats chance at the White House and a potential opportunity to appoint a couple of liberal Supreme Court Justices. Hillary must be sweating bullets worrying about such a possibility, if there is anything at all damaging to her in them.

... because it is no doubt uppermost in the minds of average voters.

... says that the White House is worried.

He's been in some people are sayin' territory for a while now.

.... some people are saying' as he is. So are a lot of people. Actually, so is pretty much everyone.

Carl's problem is that he still wants people to believe he has the connections he once had.

... to say "some people are sayin'"?

As I said, pretty much anyone can say it. And it's just as meaningless when Bernstein says it as when anyone else says it.

... was reliable journalism, I wouldn't be here - I'd be too busy watching FOX-News.

He's familiar with unauthorized recordings of speeches.

The average voter was pretty well informed about what Romney thought of them when they pulled the lever in the voting booth.

1. Demand that HRC release transcripts of speeches that have absolutely nothing to do with her campaign for the nomination or the presidency.

2. Insist that HRC isn't releasing those transcripts because she has "something to hide".

3. Keep make references to Romney and his "47%er statement" in order to instill the idea that there is a similar statement contained in the unreleased transcripts.

4. Insist that this is a MAJOR issue that everyone is interested in - when the only folks who ARE interested are desperate Bernie supporters who are hoping against hope that something in those speeches will destroy HRC's commanding national lead over BS.

IDK if there is a transcript.

N/T

Remember Nixswines 13 minute gap?

And it turns out she sides with banks over the average person

The kind she can't dodge--unlike sniper fire.

Don't spoil the surprise.

Americans are FED UP with politicians catering to elite financial interests over average American interests.

For the love of God I have no idea how anyone could possibly discern otherwise.