The transcripts are a red herring to whitewash taking the money

[kristopher]

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.

(CNN)Hillary Clinton and her husband, former President Bill Clinton, combined to earn more than $153 million in paid speeches from 2001 until Hillary Clinton launched her presidential campaign last spring, a CNN analysis shows.

In total, the two gave 729 speeches from February 2001 until May, receiving an average payday of $210,795 for each address. The two also reported at least $7.7 million for at least 39 speeches to big banks, including Goldman Sachs and UBS, with Hillary Clinton, the Democratic 2016 front-runner, collecting at least $1.8 million for at least eight speeches to big banks...

http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/05/politics/hillary-clinton-bill-clinton-paid-speeches/

Total Bill and Hillary Clinton speech income, Feb. 2001 thru May 2015:
TOTAL: AVERAGE: SPEECHES:
$153,669,691.00 $210,795.19 729
Total Bill Clinton speech income, Feb. 2001 thru May 2015:
TOTAL: AVERAGE: SPEECHES:
$132,021,691.00 $207,255.40 637
Total Hillary Clinton speech income, April 2013 thru March 2015:
TOTAL: AVERAGE: SPEECHES:
$21,648,000.00 $235,304.35 92

More at link above

[cali]

1. Hillary's greed and arrogance is breathtaking.

[kristopher]

10. Isn't it though?

[LonePirate]

2. In fairness the bulk of that money was earned by Bill while she was Sen or SoS and not a candidate

Every spouse of a former President will be in pretty much the same situation.

[kristopher]

3. Hillary Clinton speech income, April 2013 thru March 2015: $21,648,000.00

[LonePirate]

4. Are you agreeing with or trying to refute my point? 6/7ths or the bulk is Bill's income

[kristopher]

5. Hillary Clinton speech income, April 2013 thru March 2015: $21,648,000.00

$21,648,000.00

[LonePirate]

6. Posting the same info 3 times adds nothing new to the conversation but whatever. Care to go for 4?

[kristopher]

7. Thanks for bumping the thread.

Hillary Clinton speech income, April 2013 thru March 2015: $21,648,000.00

[ejbr]

8. K & R

[Blus4u]

9. Kick

K&R


Peace

[BernieforPres2016]

11. K&R

Hillary Clinton served on the Board of Directors of Wal-Mart for 6 years while Sam Walton was still alive. During part of her tenure he was still CEO.

One of the things Sam Walton was known for, from the very beginning of his company, is that he would not let his buyers accept even a free cup of coffee from potential or existing suppliers to Wal-Mart because taking gifts would inevitably create a conflict of interest and affect their judgment.

While I think Hillary should release the transcripts, the fact that she ever took the fees to begin with is the bigger issue. A federal judge would have to recuse herself from hearing a case that involved somebody who had paid them hundreds of thousands of dollars for a few boiler plate "speeches". Why should the threshold be lower than that for a President or member of Congress.