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
 

Logical

(22,457 posts)
Mon Feb 8, 2016, 12:52 PM Feb 2016

Hillary wasn't "offered" those speaking fees, she demanded them!


Anderson Cooper: "But did you have to be paid $675,000 [for three speeches to Goldman Sachs]?"

Hillary Clinton: "Well, I don't know. That's what they offered."


Hillary is veering from the truth when she suggests her $225,000 per speech fee, paid three times by Goldman Sachs, was "what they offered."

It was not what they offered -- it was what Team Hillary demanded.

A review of her 2014 tax return posted on her website shows that $225,000 was her minimum fee.

She received $225,000 for 34 of the 41 speeches listed on her tax return. Of the remaining 7 speeches, two were for 250,000 and the others for $265,000, $275,000, $285,000, $305,000 and $400,000. In total she received $9,680,000 for these speaking engagements in 2013.

Wall Street firms funded 14 of her 41 talks. In addition to Goldman Sachs, the list includes Morgan Stanley, Deutsche Bank, Fidelity Investments UBS and Bank of America. Her benefactors also include hedge funds and private equity firms like Apollo Management and Kohlberg, Kravis, Roberts.

Much more at link:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/les-leopold/hillary-not-truthful-abou_b_9185412.html
17 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Hillary wasn't "offered" those speaking fees, she demanded them! (Original Post) Logical Feb 2016 OP
She is just sounding silly now. Nt Logical Feb 2016 #1
The old saying "Are you going to believe me or your lying eyes? " ladjf Feb 2016 #2
Liar liar ... CountAllVotes Feb 2016 #3
I guess she didn't want to admit Merryland Feb 2016 #4
Veering from the truth. SamKnause Feb 2016 #5
Now they were demands, wow. Thinkingabout Feb 2016 #6
So what? leftofcool Feb 2016 #7
She is a liar! Is that ok with you? Nt Logical Feb 2016 #8
They are fine with it. SamKnause Feb 2016 #12
Of course they are fine with it, they have made that exceedingly clear LondonReign2 Feb 2016 #17
I share your comment/attitude CatWoman Feb 2016 #13
Why the stupid lie? It shows very poor judgement. (nt) jeff47 Feb 2016 #14
A lying candidate is just peachy with some. R. Daneel Olivaw Feb 2016 #15
She seems Faux pas Feb 2016 #9
What stuns me... Bohemianwriter Feb 2016 #10
More lies. Such a surprise Arazi Feb 2016 #11
The hits just keep on coming. Nt Logical Feb 2016 #16

Merryland

(1,134 posts)
4. I guess she didn't want to admit
Mon Feb 8, 2016, 01:00 PM
Feb 2016

that she had a set speaking fee - so easy to disprove her statement, why did she lie?

SamKnause

(13,107 posts)
12. They are fine with it.
Mon Feb 8, 2016, 01:14 PM
Feb 2016

They don't care what she says or does.

They want Hillary and they are determined.

The truth will not sway them.

LondonReign2

(5,213 posts)
17. Of course they are fine with it, they have made that exceedingly clear
Mon Feb 8, 2016, 04:40 PM
Feb 2016

It is rather amazing to me we have people claiming to be Democrats that are perfectly OK with it.

 

Bohemianwriter

(978 posts)
10. What stuns me...
Mon Feb 8, 2016, 01:10 PM
Feb 2016

Is how she can "surge" in the polls in NH at this point?

I mean, the venom emenating from her should be as clear as a neon sign by now woudn't it?

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Hillary wasn't "offered" ...