Tick Tock...

Shifting the focus from the list to the transcripts is simply dumb. When she releases them and they say nothing, then what are we going to do, go back to pointing at the list and looking like a fool?

for understanding our concerns and move on. Yes, I would rather look like a fool over nothing in the transcripts than a fool for not seeing them and something being there.

Just keep posting the excepted part of this and you'll do her a lot of damage. Post it daily and keep the focus on her taking $20M from these special interests. Link it to her obligation if she gets the presidency.

Or give her a way to defuse that massive, massive lever.

It's your choice.


My original post with the material below is here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511272314

Give it a bump if you would, please?

.........................................................

So the same press that has shut out Bernie for 6 months now; the same campaign and media that set up these choreographed debates and town halls to promote Hillary and destroy Bernie, is now suddenly trying to play gotcha with Hillary?

Nope.

They are setting up the false premise that the transcripts owned by Hillary are not being released because those transcripts prove that she is engaged in nefarious behavior.

After all, almost no one trusts Hillary, right? How do you overcome that and the receipt of millions of dollars in direct payments to the candidate?

Isn't the corollary to this manufactured narrative one that, when the transcripts show nothing but a little clubbiness, it means she didn't do anything wrong?

"Of course she made money when she could" they will say.

"After all, who wouldn't, right?"

"We're all a little greedy, right?"

I mean think about it, what is supposed to be going on at these talks that could be harmful to Hillary?
Hillary's part of a rigged system, not an idiot.

This big deal being made about the transcripts is intended to direct attention away from the real issue - the money was paid to gain access. In fact, the very existence of the topic seems tailor made to clean up an otherwise disqualifying act by the candidate. Can you imagine any other candidate getting away with it?

The storyline being created by the Clinton campaign and the media, by design, diverts attention away from the fact that the money bought access to the presidential candidate.

Access is everything; paid access like this is legal corruption.

your post. At face value, your point makes sense so I will defer to your analysis. Should there be concerns, I will reply. Cheers.

She was basically letting Wall St. "off the hook" for the 2007 Crash, telling them it wasn't really
their fault, shifting the blame to the victims of the crash. Very unbecoming for a POTUS candidate
in 2016.

**** ^ **** ^ **** ^ **** ^ **** ^ **** ^ **** ^ **** ^ **** ^ **** ^ **** ^ **** ^

NEW YORK — When Hillary Clinton spoke to Goldman Sachs executives and technology titans at a summit in Arizona in October of 2013, she spoke glowingly of the work the bank was doing raising capital and helping create jobs, according to people who saw her remarks.

Clinton, who received $225,000 for her appearance, praised the diversity of Goldman’s workforce and the prominent roles played by women at the blue-chip investment bank and the tech firms present at the event. She spent no time criticizing Goldman or Wall Street more broadly for its role in the 2008 financial crisis.

“It was pretty glowing about us,” one person who watched the event said. “It’s so far from what she sounds like as a candidate now. It was like a rah-rah speech. She sounded more like a Goldman Sachs managing director.”

At another speech to Goldman and its big asset management clients in New York in 2013, Clinton spoke about how it wasn’t just the banks that caused the financial crisis and that it was worth looking at the landmark 2010 Dodd-Frank financial reform law to see what was working and what wasn’t.

“It was mostly basic stuff, small talk, chit-chat,” one person who attended that speech said. “But in this environment, it could be made to look really bad.”


Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/clinton-speeches-218969#ixzz40jtheMAJ

Is she still thinking about it? Or did she just lie to the voters again?

as right-wing as they come..

Freebeacon is a right-wing website. Why is it being used as a reference point here at DU? Do you not see the irony?

Is the list accurate, or not? THAT is the issue. If you think the list is NOT the issue, feel free to not respond.

know who these people are. It is right-wing propaganda at DU. Who would have thunk it?

...you will see there are links to support every one of those entries. The links are from major media papers AND from the Clinton campaign site.

Talk about right-wing...do you know what Bill Clinton said about them?? "Facts bounce off them."

Have a nice day.

the anti-Hills. That's why she ain't gonna do it.

"No one except the Anti Hills give a damn". Sanders supporters would be considered AntiHills.

Then he became a Sanders supporter. Seems pretty straightforward.

Or that the intermediary for the list is more important than the list and its source?

no one but Repugs and Bernie's supporters gives a damn about Hillary's transcript. It is a right-wing talking point. Bernie's supports comes off as desperate.

sorry you believe that our voices and opinions don't matter.

it doesn't matter!

Facts are facts no matter what.

One of the most extremely important OPs I've seen. Thank you.

Hillary Clinton visited the millionaire bankers more frequently than most people go to the grocery store.

That's effed up.

It would take several full-time people, working day and night, to transcribe all of that!

That's effed up.

So blatant.

but not as often as Hillary visits her beloved banker friends.

That's effed up.

Boggles the mind, really.

She has been paid obscene amounts of money from them. There is NO way she's going to do the things that need to be done in this country.

Her Cabinet appointments will be stacked with Wall Street cronies.
Bernie's Cabinet appointments will not.

Huge difference.

Those banks aren't paying her to say "stop the shenanigans" or to hear ideas about how rein them in.

as frequently as she sucked up to these bankers, she'd be in better shape than Ronda Rousey.

That's effed up.

(Sry. If I don't laugh, I cry.)

Must have been her Winter vacation with HENRY KISSINGER.

This is why I will not support her. Period. She is NOT on our side.

do you like this?

eom

Instead of staying in Nevada (which she is now doing, since she was losing)...

I'll bet that was some fundraiser again.

Ugh...feels and smells corrupt.

How much money...
Who it came from...

FOLLOW THE GOD-DAMNED MONEY!!!

No one gives a SHIT about -what- she said.

They care about who paid how much for her saying whatever.

How old is -THAT- advice???????

Although I'd bet heavy that there are some juicy details in the transcripts.

Anyone honestly think they paid that kind of cash to hear her story?

and so is the amount but what she said could easily be much more important than the amount.

These were closed to the public for Elite ears only. I do want to know what is said to the Oligarchy behind my back.

I do not trust her enough to let this just pass. and neither do most people

What was said isn't the issue.

It -really- is the money accepted by a politician still in the midst of a career.

It's legal graft. But people -get- that it really looks like GRAFT.

Look, she lies. We know it, we've experienced it. It's important who she is lying to and what about.

She says she's against things she once supported (because it's politically necessary) Stop trying to sweep this under the rug. It is important what was said behind closed doors.

Here's two, but as you know, the list is HUGE:

For Keystone XL, now against it.

Supported TPP helped write it - now against it? Really? Why would you believe these flipflops?

What has she promised to each of these subsets of the Oligarchy? Don't worry about what I tell the Rubes, After I'm elected I'll flip again?

It's important. If she manages to weasel her way to a nomination, the Republicans are not going to take a pass. LEt's get it out now while we have time to make corrections.

It's very very unlikely that -any- of that was scripted Yes, there probably were recordings whose transcriptions she controls by contract with the sponsors.

What was said really means little next to the hundreds of thousands of dollars she accepted to participate.

It's special treatment to a person whose future the investment houses thought could move the markets.

It's not about -what- was said. It's about being chosen by the elite, and paid big money as a consequence.

and hoping that it's not important.

I want to know whether or not it is.

AND SO WILL THE REPUBLICANS IN THE NEXT PHASE OF THIS THING. We need to know NOW!

It's all quite obvious.

It's about being selected o recieve big money as a mover and shaker by the investment houses.

What I would guess is that if and when HRC finally caves on this issue there will be little in what she said to audiences that is an issue.

What will remain an issue is HRC being chosen to recieve huge amounts of money to share her view of reality with selected big dollar investors who could work understanding of that view into their investment planning

...greed, or what?