Clinton defends Wall Street speaking fees: ‘That’s what they offered’

[Blackrook]

The Devil has only a few years left before he can collect Hillary's soul.

 

[Jackson]

Clinton defends Wall Street speaking fees: ‘That’s what they offered’

Hillary Clinton on Wednesday night defended accepting huge speaking fees from Goldman Sachs, arguing that it won’t influence the way she treats the banking industry.

Speaking at CNN’s Democratic presidential forum, anchor Anderson Cooper pressed Clinton on whether it had been a mistake for her to reel in more than $200,000 per speech for three speeches to the Wall Street giant.

"Look, I made speeches to lots of groups. I told them what I thought. I answered questions," Clinton said.

“But did you have to be paid $675,000?,” Cooper asked.

“Well I don’t know,” Clinton responded. “That’s what they offered.”

The crowd burst into laughter as Clinton explained that “every secretary of State I know has done that.”

Cooper shot back that usually the secretary of State is not preparing to run for president.

“To be honest I wasn’t committed to running,” Clinton said. “I didn’t know whether I would run or not.”

Clinton said she would not be influenced by the money.

“Anybody who knows me that thinks they can influence me – name anything they’ve influenced me on,” she said. “Just name one thing. I’m out here every day saying I’m going to shut them down, I’m going after them, I’m going to jail them if they should be jailed. I’m going to break them up.”

“They’re not giving me very much money now, I can tell you that much,” she said. “Fine with me.”

Earlier in the night, Sanders said a super-PAC supporting Clinton for president had taken in $15 million so far from Wall Street donors.

Clinton claimed Wednesday night that 90 percent of the donors to her actual campaign were “small dollar donors.”

*****

Hillary is so bought and paid for that her own fellow Democrats are laughing at her greed and avarice.

Pulling the lever for Hillary means four more years of helping Wall Street investors get wealthy no matter how bad it gets for Main Street.

The mistake Clinton made is she didn't accept the money for charity.
And donate it all to me!!

She could have done that...Give it to charity...The Clinton Foundation Charity.

The Clinton Foundation a charity? Ya kiddin right? For who? Her and her serial pervert husband?

Clinton Foundation Failed to Disclose 1,100 Foreign Donations

Is Hillary Clinton Banking On Foreign Money For 2016 Run?


Clinton Foundation Defends Acceptance of Foreign Donations

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/u...ssed-for-control-of-uranium-company.html?_r=0

http://www.cnn.com/2015/02/19/politics/clinton-foundation-defends-foreign-donations/index.html

Foreign Donations to Clinton Foundation Raise Questions

Hillary Clinton's Foundation Under Fire for Foreign Investments & One from a 'Conservative' News Outlet

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/419791/clinton-foundation-reeks-crooks-thieves-and-hoods-deroy-murdock

The Clinton Foundation Reeks of Crooks, Thieves, and Hoods, by Deroy Murdock, National Review


Take your pick.

 

[emilynghiem]

The Devil has only a few years left before he can collect Hillary's soul.

Not sure even the Devil would want it by then

 

[Blackrook]

Hillary's success, otherwise, makes no sense.

 

[DarkFury]

"“To be honest I wasn’t committed to running,” Clinton said. “I didn’t know whether I would run or not.”

Ah what? She knew TWO YEARS ago she was running. She was ALREADY raising money. Can she make ANY statement without lying?

 

[DarkFury]

The Devil has only a few years left before he can collect Hillary's soul.

Not sure even the Devil would want it by then

He will more then likely refuse it knowing she intends to replace him.

 

[Jackson]

Hillary's success, otherwise, makes no sense.

Really, what actual success has she had?

 

[Jackson]

"“To be honest I wasn’t committed to running,” Clinton said. “I didn’t know whether I would run or not.”

Ah what? She knew TWO YEARS ago she was running. She was ALREADY raising money. Can she make ANY statement without lying?

I think it's really hard for her.

 

[emilynghiem]

Hillary's success, otherwise, makes no sense.

Really, what actual success has she had?

Dear Jackson

1. She has succeeded in getting away with / surviving
a lot of things that might have destroyed other people's careers and chances at anything else.

2. Not all contributions can be measured in terms of being the one credited with success.
Some things in life are like a baseball game, where you may not credit the player who makes the
sacrifice bunt to send a run home, but you only remember the winning run. In truth it took all the players
to make that play happen. So you can't just count the person who you see actually score.

For example, we are eventually going to have health care reform that works, because what we have now got totally messed up. Clinton originally pushed for health care reform, including ideas like taxing cigarettes and using that to offset costs. All that failed, but the campaign to push for it was part of the progression. Later, Obama actually got something to go through, as disastrous as it was. The point politically was to get something passed that he could claim was a stepping stone. I see it negatively, like holding a gun to the taxpayers' heads until legislators come up with a better plan. But it is being used as leverage to push for corrections and change that will work, given the current system is rejected by both left and right who don't want it either.

Even if the attempts by Clinton and Obama are failures and negative, the fact they pushed contributes to the eventual goal of solving problems over the longrun. I don't agree, justify or approve of the faulty plans they pushed; I'm just saying it is part of the path to get to the eventual solution. So it is indirectly contributing.

3. Something I remember seeing years ago, buried in the back of the newspaper, was a photo of
Hillary Clinton and Tom Delay campaigning together on a common issue -- of opening up the adoption or foster
process to be more accessible. That legislation succeeded because people were all behind it from all sides.
The contribution I see there is people working together across party lines, and I wish more focus was on that.
To find the angle, issue or solutions in each situation that all sides can align with instead of forcing and fighting.

 

[BluesLegend]

I see the blatant corruption in our government is on full display. Look nobody pays $675,000 to hear some old hag speak, its a cover for selling political favors to the highest bidder.

 

[Dovahkiin]

I don't even care if she takes money from wall street. GOP candidates do the same thing.

 

[Jackson]

Hillary's success, otherwise, makes no sense.

Really, what actual success has she had?

Dear Jackson

1. She has succeeded in getting away with / surviving
a lot of things that might have destroyed other people's careers and chances at anything else.

2. Not all contributions can be measured in terms of being the one credited with success.
Some things in life are like a baseball game, where you may not credit the player who makes the
sacrifice bunt to send a run home, but you only remember the winning run. In truth it took all the players
to make that play happen. So you can't just count the person who you see actually score.

For example, we are eventually going to have health care reform that works, because what we have now got totally messed up. Clinton originally pushed for health care reform, including ideas like taxing cigarettes and using that to offset costs. All that failed, but the campaign to push for it was part of the progression. Later, Obama actually got something to go through, as disastrous as it was. The point politically was to get something passed that he could claim was a stepping stone. I see it negatively, like holding a gun to the taxpayers' heads until legislators come up with a better plan. But it is being used as leverage to push for corrections and change that will work, given the current system is rejected by both left and right who don't want it either.

Even if the attempts by Clinton and Obama are failures and negative, the fact they pushed contributes to the eventual goal of solving problems over the longrun. I don't agree, justify or approve of the faulty plans they pushed; I'm just saying it is part of the path to get to the eventual solution. So it is indirectly contributing.

3. Something I remember seeing years ago, buried in the back of the newspaper, was a photo of
Hillary Clinton and Tom Delay campaigning together on a common issue -- of opening up the adoption or foster
process to be more accessible. That legislation succeeded because people were all behind it from all sides.
The contribution I see there is people working together across party lines, and I wish more focus was on that.
To find the angle, issue or solutions in each situation that all sides can align with instead of forcing and fighting.

Emily, you are a good person, but I have to disagree. When Hillary attempts are abject failures, stating,
"Well I tried".. appears to be good enough. There was something inherently wrong with her plan that even their own party could not win it for her in the long run.

She and Bill's questionable acts in the past were not noteworthy, they were questionable because they they either do break the law or skirt it which just plain is not admirable. Yesterday, it was learned that indictments were drafted for their White Water practices. How we hear, after the investigations, that there was "nothing" there probably is not true. They have been getting away with lies and misdeeds for years.

They call their secret service detail, "Pigs." How telling is that ,that they can't even be civil to the same people that protect their lives?

Google Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Foundation and see the sleazy reputation it has.

She gave speeches on something that was successful. She did not originate the legislation, did she?

All over we can find people that make speeches on behalf of a plan. That doesn't make them POTUS material. We see that some are originating plans that do not pass congress.. That doesn't make them POTUS material. Hillary has the highest negatives in her party. That does not make for POTUS material. She cannot be civil to people "beneath her." That does make her an unqualified ass. Again, not POTUS material.

I think I'll join others in the Democratic Party, and pass on Hillary.