I don't think we ever will see those speech transcripts

[SHRED]

I guess we don't have a right to see what was said to those who really do run our country.

She is giving speeches and being paid for them by fascists and we're just suppose to ignore it.

...

[LibDemAlways]

1. No one pays six figures to be criticized, castigated, and

called on the carpet. Hillary was paid that money to tell those crooks exactly what they wanted to hear. It's like a famous musician who accepts a princely sum to appear at a private function hosted by a millionaire. The guy writing the check calls the shots, and it's a safe bet the performer's set list is dictated by the host.

Hillary could level with the public and explain how the system works, or she can continue to stonewall and hope the issue goes away. Hopefully, Bernie won't let that happen.

[riversedge]

2. No one cares except Bernie-his fans and of course Chuckie Toad

[casperthegm]

10. I think you're right

And that's what I find disconcerting. That the voting public lets this and much more go unchecked, shrugging it off as if this is just the way things go in politics...it's just sad.

[revbones]

30. Brilliant!

You deflected and made fun of Chuck Todd's name! Sheer Brilliance!

[Fumesucker]

3. Not until the general, then it will all come out

I'm wondering what the worst possible timing for Clinton would be, about ten days before the election would be my pick but arguments can be made for bringing them out before that and let her swing in the wind for a while.

[cosmicone]

4. There is no right to see anything private

Next you'd want transcripts of Hillary's Thanksgiving dinner with her family.

[Avalux]

6. BWAAAHAAAHAAA!

So you're equating Thanksgiving dinner to speeches given to a sector of our society that is trying to usurp our democracy?

[cosmicone]

15. Still a private event. n/t

[Avalux]

16. My mind is boggled by your lack of understanding. n/t

[GeorgiaPeanuts]

21. I'll help you...

Clinton can do no harm.
Clinton is a Dem.
Clinton can do no harm.
Clinton is a Dem.

Repeat that 20 times every night before bed, and you will eventually receive the progra-- I mean light!

[Avalux]

29. As I like to say....

be careful when you sell your soul, you may not like the new owner.

[SHRED]

11. Thanksgiving would interesting

Although not the same.

http://m.motherjones.com/politics/2016/02/hillary-clinton-kissinger-vacation-dominican-republic-de-la-renta

[TheDormouse]

19. I see what you did there-- hehehehehe

[SHRED]

20. Well...they mentioned a holiday afterall

[lumberjack_jeff]

26. If she sold dinner table seats to wall street CEOs for $250,000 each, I'd ask what was on the menu

But yeah, there is no right to be annointed president either.

[cosmicone]

33. The fundraising dinners DO NOT increase the limit on contributions

Even if she sold dinners for $100 billion, she can only keep $5400 of that money.

The rest of the money goes to DNC and various state democratic committees for down-ticket candidates ... like superdelegates.

Just saying there is something nefarious about a $250K dinner is an asinine smear.

[lumberjack_jeff]

34. Gibberish. She was paid millions for *something*

The transcripts of the speeches when released, will hint at exactly what was being sold.

[cosmicone]

35. You win the cheese n/t

[revbones]

31. Yes, because they are exactly the same.

Actually, now that you mention it - given that she spent holidays with Kissinger, I wonder which bankers she spends Thanksgiving with?

[Tarc]

5. It is no longer an important issue

[DanTex]

7. Probably not, and nobody cares. Except for people who consider private enterprise to be "fascist".

[SHRED]

12. I'm not against private enterprise

It's when it's interests steer our government away from us is when they are venturing into fascist territory.

See the difference?

[revbones]

32. Ooooh. Standing up for Wall St now. Going full right wing? nt

[amborin]

8. perhaps partly explains why she's reluctant to debate in NY: Qns about transcripts

bankers don't throw away big bucks for the fun of it

[PonyUp]

9. Maybe she's waiting to see if she HAS to release them.

If she's indicted there will be no need to.

[geek tragedy]

13. if anyone who was undecided cared, maybe she would

but when the only people making noise about it are Sanders supporters, no benefit

[SHRED]

18. and I'm sure you've done the polling

[SHRED]

23. I'm sure the Repukes are interested...

...should she make it to the general election.
We will see them then and it will be too late.
Better to be vetted and transparent now and let it blow over now in my opinion.

..

[geek tragedy]

24. you really think Clinton, in prepared remarks for which she kept an accurate transcript,

made some game-changing remarks that would end her political career?

[SHRED]

27. we may find out

I hope there is nothing to them actually considering she has a good chance at the nomination.

[EndElectoral]

14. No way she's ever going to release them, she knows what's in them

[IdaBriggs]

17. We won't. She is a lawyer and said stuff her clients (the people paying for her time)

wanted to hear. Without that context - she was just saying what the audience wanted and didn't REALLY mean it - it would sound like she was criticizing Obama and making promises that would hurt the 99%.

Seriously, do you expect her to release the transcripts when they can damage her campaign?

[SHRED]

22. We might...

I'm sure the Repukes will get them should she make it to the general.

[lumberjack_jeff]

25. Yes, dammit! The fate of the world depends on you ignoring her broken promises and ethics problems!

I think Walter Sobschak had it right. "Fuck it, let's go bowling".

[Orsino]

28. 55 days.

http://iwilllookintoit.com

[Buns_of_Fire]

36. Probably not. But I doubt there's any "smoking gun" there anyway.

Maybe some embarrassing stuff, but nothing catastrophic. It's not like the Clintons are known for their transparency.

The question has always been WHY whatever she said to a closed crowd was worth a quarter-million to hear.

(And those so inclined can save the Lady Gaga comparisons. Lady Gaga isn't running for President.)

[Bettie]

37. If she doesn't want to share what she said

I think we can make pretty good guesses as to what was in there.

It isn't good for us "little people".

[SHRED]

38. And if tRump gets their nomination...

...I'll bet he releases them at just the appropriate time to damage her.
I've heard him say many times that he can't be bought so it's kinda obvious where this could go.

Selfish on her part to not be vetted because it's potentially damaging to the party come November.

[Bettie]

39. Haven't you heard...

she's inevitable!

She can literally not lose, she doesn't need any of us lousy lefties, she doesn't need independents, she's just going to win due to the many Republicans who will cross party lines because of their love for her.

So, clearly, vetting is not necessary, she's inevitable.

[Skwmom]

40. I think we'll see so called "transcripts" when she's ready to pivot running as a Republican. nt