This expresses my opinion about "the transcripts."

[LAS14]

My shorthand for this view is, "Of course she won't release the speeches, she'd be drowned in smears because she said 'Thank you. I'm happy to be here tonight.'

http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/04/everyone-knows-why-hillary-clinton-wont-release-her-goldman-sachs-speeches

[TexasTowelie]

1. I suspect that she has a contractual obligation

not to divulge the transcripts or video of speeches given to those organizations. That is standard fare in those circumstances. If she did provide that information then her opponents would be able to raise the issue of trust since she broke the contract.

[OhZone]

2. Yup. n/t

[BlueCaliDem]

3. Not only that, but she could face an expensive breach of contract lawsuit. Not something you

need when you're winning the Democratic Party primaries and is the front-runner.

[LAS14]

4. I don't think there's a contract thing.

Early on I saw a story that seemed pretty credible. The contract included transcripts that were her sole property. It's a decision on her part. Like the Mother Jones author, I'm completely confident that there's nothing worse than saying some nice things about employers doing some good things.

[DavidDvorkin]

5. Assuming there's no contractual impediment, I wish she had released them long ago

Yes, the Sanders people would deliberately misquote and misinterpret them, but the actual transcripts would be available to contradict them. As it is now, this is being blown up ridiculously, and there's no way to shut the idiots up.

[Her Sister]

6. I think the people that are voting for her don't care.

The only ones that "care" are the ones that aren't going to vote for her. Wondering if they have an agenda!?

[fleabiscuit]

7. Look at it this way;

She has got to be the most scrutinized, demonized, lied about politician from her haters and crazy idealists in history.

She gave those speeches as a PRIVATE INDIVIDUAL. She could release them tomorrow and nothing would be found that would make any difference in how anyone feels or thinks about her. No scandal, no 'gotchas' or anything slanderous. That's just not her.

But! This ONE thing is something she alone still has control about being released. Hers. Not BS, not Dump, no-one but HER.

This is her F!U! detractors.

And I'm loving it.

Don't bother trying to sugar coat it some other way for me.

The end.

[yallerdawg]

8. 'They' don't care what's on the transcripts.

'They' already "know" and the actual release of any transcripts won't change a thing.

And 'we' don't give a shit!

[creon]

9. I know what I would have done.

I would have gone to a debate and done one of two things:
Started reading the transcripts aloud myself
Or
gave them to Sanders and told him to start reading them aloud.

Either one would have brought down the house.

[question everything]

10. Frankly, I don't think she owes anyone anything

they want the transcripts, tough.

[jrandom421]

11. Everyone who wants the transcripts

is going to call them "altered" or "doctored" if they don't end with "HAIL HYDRA!"