The minute she stopped being the SOS, she was a private individual.

While at the same time professing to be tough on them?

Didn't think so.

But, I don't care about what she said in these speeches. The same way that I don't care what Sanders said either in any non-public speech he may have given. I care about the here and now.

Do you have like, a memory loop going, where every five hours or so you forget everything? Because you do seem to have an awfully short term understanding of "here and now." Surely I'm naive, to think that things people did in the recent past might indicate what they'll do in the middle term future. We should just leave this stuff to our superiors, like Clinton and Blankfein.

She is under no obligation to do so, and I doubt she will. They are her property by contact as a private citizen. People may not like her decision, but it is hers to make.

And I'll tell you what, here's what I think about the whole transcripts kerfunkle:

We already KNOW what's in those transcripts. It's exactly what we would EXPECT to see. Those transcripts would show that Hillary tailors her message depending on who's waving the dollars. And she tells them whatever it is she thinks they want to hear. It's not rocket science. The first time a corporation heard she uttered a word against their existence/success would be the last time she was invited behind closed doors to speak with a corporation. Some people call that pandering. I would add that her pandering knows no boundaries up to and including the affectation of fake accents.

So who gives a shit about the transcripts? It's awesome to see Hillary's sycophants squirm, and I hope she DOESN'T release them for that reason.

If Bernie wants to see her speeches he'll have to get a subpoena and stand in line with the rest of the VRWC which sad to say he's sounding more and more like.

Pandermonium.

I'll simply stipulate to their content and be done with it (although I AM curious to know if she affected any fake accents depending on what state the corporation she was pandering to was headquartered in).

Today it's her speeches, tomorrow it's her high school report card. Then the receipts for every box of Girls Scout cookies she CLAIMED she sold in grade school. And so on. It got ridiculous back around 1993.

And I think the American people deserve to know what she said in those speeches. I could give a rat's ass if it's never been asked of a presidential candidate before.

But that's just my opinion. It's all I got to go with.

not care to be very transparent about? Obviously we've never had a candidate who has had speaking income comparable to hers, but every single candidate is fully vetted in their income generating work, none have ever said that their private sector work was secret, nor that it was off limits.

In 2008 I remember a great deal of stink about the property line at Obama's Chicago house and a neighbor and oh, some horrible scandal involving a foot of fencing or something. But Hillary is a millionaire from speeches no one can see. Does that seem like equal treatment?

"Hillary Rodham Clinton dropped the name of Barack Obama's Chicago patron into the South Carolina debate Monday night, putting front and center a tangled relationship that has the potential to undermine Obama's image as a candidate whose ethical standards are distinctly higher than those of his main opponent."
http://articles.latimes.com/2008/jan/23/nation/na-rezko23

Until Bernie.