Hillary's speeches to Goldman Sachs give them a nice bit of leverage on her.

[Marr]

She doesn't want those speeches released. The natural assumption is that she said things to Goldman Sachs that they liked hearing, but most voters would not.

So what happens when HRC has to make any sort of call that effects the big banks? She's basically handed them their own pre-packaged scandal to deploy whenever they feel the need. Kind of hard to oppose something like, say, bailing out the big banks (yet again) when they can release your fawning praise of said banks, and who knows what sort of promises, whenever you step out of line.

[mmonk]

1. There will be bail ins first as banks are now required

to do them before bail outs. The next one will be a double whammy on the American people (having their deposits and savings seized by the banks first).

[PonyUp]

2. Please give Hillary some credit!

Oh, that's right...she has Goldman Sachs. She doesn't need credit!

[stonecutter357]

3. 48% of Republicans would'nt vote for Trump if he's the nominee.

leverage on her

[gcomeau]

4. How many Democrats would vote for Clinton...

...if it came out she said some *really* unappetizing things that completely contradict her public rhetoric when she was behind closed doors taking their money?

Yeah. Leverage. And that doesn't just apply to election season, it applies to after.

[Arazi]

5. Her nickname at Goldman Sachs is Goldman Handcuffs. i rest my case

[NCTraveler]

6. I'm simply thinking she releases them after the primary.

She has Sanders supporters so distracted over this that it is muddying the waters. Her actions are controlling the narrative and what Sanders supporters haven't figured out yet is that it isn't hurting her.

[mhatrw]

7. Leverage? She is the lever they paid good money for. nt