Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: Hillary!!! I don't give a shit what the GOP said to Wall Street! I want to know what YOU SAID! [View all]
Cayenneman
(10 posts)62. Want my vote?
Then release the transcripts!
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
185 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Hillary!!! I don't give a shit what the GOP said to Wall Street! I want to know what YOU SAID! [View all]
Logical
Feb 2016
OP
If Hillary was smart, she'd get out in front of this... but that's a big IF!
InAbLuEsTaTe
Feb 2016
#182
Where do you think Nance? Do you need everything spelled out for you?
Joe the Revelator
Feb 2016
#91
There is already one reporter who claims, i will concede its only a claim that he/she has a
Joe the Revelator
Feb 2016
#103
Nice picture of Hillary as your avatar Nance, that the same one you had back in '08? n/t
A Simple Game
Feb 2016
#156
Silly? No not at all. Tell us some of the things you were saying about Hillary back then.
A Simple Game
Feb 2016
#174
Lol, seriously? Ask romney about how private speeches get public. You seriously...
Logical
Feb 2016
#128
Illegal? No, that would be really unusual. But I want to hear if it is generic or praise. nt
Logical
Feb 2016
#7
I agree totally. However, Hillary supporters defended Capehart using a debunked photo claim.
Rilgin
Feb 2016
#119
Proof has to be really firm though too, as Capehart also had *false* "proof" to back up his claims..
cascadiance
Feb 2016
#169
For hundreds of thousands of dollars, you can bet honey was dripping in those speeches. n/t
PonyUp
Feb 2016
#127
Would you vote for her in the GE if she really did tell Wall Street what she tells Main Street?
LonePirate
Feb 2016
#26
She wouldn't be the first or last politician to tell different things to different people.
LonePirate
Feb 2016
#38
Even if only to quell the rampant presumption of guilt, yes, she should release them.
LonePirate
Feb 2016
#70
Even if everything was released and unequivocally above board, people would still disbelieve.
LonePirate
Feb 2016
#87
Maybe she prefers privacy. I have no idea. The presumption of guilt is ridiculous, though.
LonePirate
Feb 2016
#85
And we've seen a pattern of this with the email server controversy, etc. too.
cascadiance
Feb 2016
#170
he re-tailored his speech for the "black church" the other night. rearranged that sucker and called
bettyellen
Feb 2016
#56
As far as they are concerned a black church and Bain Capital are exactly the same
Fumesucker
Feb 2016
#122
why I donate to Sanders, so he has the funds to be finally heard. I still think Mrs. Clinton....
Sunlei
Feb 2016
#123
Oh, FFS, a real human being would not sell out their values if they did not believe it. nt
Logical
Feb 2016
#185
Of course. She is running from one of her biggest liabilities which is that she has been pay to
JudyM
Feb 2016
#10
Whatever the hell it is she decided beforehand that we peasants shouldn't know.
Orsino
Feb 2016
#130
She surely knew since '13 she would run and you think she said something stupid like Romney did?
LonePirate
Feb 2016
#27
No, she claimed that she didn't know in 2013 that she would run for President in 2016
BernieforPres2016
Feb 2016
#104
It very much makes a difference because it is evidence of the nature of her relationship with
JudyM
Feb 2016
#15
She is scared of it. No doubt. If they were not praising Wall Street they would be released. nt
Logical
Feb 2016
#21
In politics, that makes your candidate look like they have something to hide. Don't quit your day
Feeling the Bern
Feb 2016
#99
Yep, either she can define what was said with the transcripts of what actually was said then...
cascadiance
Feb 2016
#166
So, you're betting that not releasing them is safer than releasing them?
NorthCarolina
Feb 2016
#177
and we all know what happened to Mitt when he didn't release all his FORMS(taxes) he lost
PatrynXX
Feb 2016
#61
I give a shit what the GOPers are saying to private groups and churches. Very much so.
bettyellen
Feb 2016
#64
There's no smoking gun in those transcripts. Hillary & the Bankers know how this game is played.
think
Feb 2016
#67
The transcripts are going to come out. I think she's trying to duck and cover till>
YOHABLO
Feb 2016
#78
Can Goldman-Sachs deduct cost of Clinton speeches ($650,000) from their tax obligation?
Arizona Roadrunner
Feb 2016
#81
I couldn't believe she said that. We know what the GOP says to Wall Street already.
Vinca
Feb 2016
#125
I can't believe we are still Asking...it is not a Question...it Does Not Matter what she said.
libdem4life
Feb 2016
#140
Hey Hillary; releasing those speeches would be easy if you have NOTHING TO HIDE
Lorien
Feb 2016
#147
Hillary!!! I don't give a shit what the GOP said to Wall Street! I want to know what YOU SAID!
The CCC
Feb 2016
#155
Bullshit! I know they love wall street? But hillary should not! The transcripts will tell. Nt
Logical
Feb 2016
#171
... and we haven't had an election where this country is so corrupted with BRIBERY like it is now!
cascadiance
Feb 2016
#167
