Jump to content

Firms that paid for Clinton speeches have US gov't interests


webfact

Recommended Posts


Is there any politician in Washington who doesn't get money from big business?

What's the big deal? The amounts?

The big deal is the corruption. Paying a politician for speeches while in office is not the same as paying a retired politician whose power and influence is expired.

Hillary is very likely to become President and that is a huge difference. Why would anyone pay hundreds of thousands of dollars if not for influence and political favors ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there any politician in Washington who doesn't get money from big business?

What's the big deal? The amounts?

The big deal is the corruption. Paying a politician for speeches while in office is not the same as paying a retired politician whose power and influence is expired.

Hillary is very likely to become President and that is a huge difference. Why would anyone pay hundreds of thousands of dollars if not for influence and political favors ?

Yeah, I think maybe you want to think about that before you continue with the "retired" bit.

Perhaps a quick read of this...

https://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/

coffee1.gif

Edited by Chicog
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Following is a link to a Politico article concerning one of her speeches to Goldman Sachs. Not a transcript, but she has those under lock and key and probably in the same file as the Rose Law Firm billing records.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

What Clinton said in her paid speeches
Recalled one attendee: 'She sounded more like a Goldman Sachs managing director.'
By BEN WHITE
02/09/16 05:15 AM EST
NEW YORK — When Hillary Clinton spoke to Goldman Sachs executives and technology titans at a summit in Arizona in October of 2013, she spoke glowingly of the work the bank was doing raising capital and helping create jobs, according to people who saw her remarks.
Clinton, who received $225,000 for her appearance, praised the diversity of Goldman’s workforce and the prominent roles played by women at the blue-chip investment bank and the tech firms present at the event. She spent no time criticizing Goldman or Wall Street more broadly for its role in the 2008 financial crisis.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Following is a link to a Politico article concerning one of her speeches to Goldman Sachs. Not a transcript, but she has those under lock and key and probably in the same file as the Rose Law Firm billing records.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

What Clinton said in her paid speeches
Recalled one attendee: 'She sounded more like a Goldman Sachs managing director.'
By BEN WHITE
02/09/16 05:15 AM EST
NEW YORK — When Hillary Clinton spoke to Goldman Sachs executives and technology titans at a summit in Arizona in October of 2013, she spoke glowingly of the work the bank was doing raising capital and helping create jobs, according to people who saw her remarks.
Clinton, who received $225,000 for her appearance, praised the diversity of Goldman’s workforce and the prominent roles played by women at the blue-chip investment bank and the tech firms present at the event. She spent no time criticizing Goldman or Wall Street more broadly for its role in the 2008 financial crisis.

Thanks for the story, Chuckd! Surely, if she had said something to the effect, however tactful, that they should clean up their act for everyone's sake, you'd think she would be eager to let everyone know.

I am not challenging you, but merely asking. I have noticed that the article is dated Feb. 9, 2016. I am wondering if, since that time, anything corroborating what this attendee did say has since come up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

'She sounded more like a Goldman Sachs managing director.'

For all of you that want a businessperson in office, there you go.

Then perhaps we should all vote for Chelsea's husband. He owns a Hedge Fund largely fueled by Clinton Foundation backers and he previously worked for Goldman Sachs for 8 years.

Her father-in-law served five years for a $10 Million Ponzi scheme fraud.

The apples don't fall very far from the tree.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc_Mezvinsky

http://www.bustle.com/articles/131322-who-is-marc-mezvinsky-chelsea-clintons-husband-comes-from-another-much-less-famous-political-family

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All Presidents and important politicians have a desk piled high with invitations.

Ronald Reagan famously traveled to Japan for a $1million speaking engagement right after he left office. That was big money back then.

It's not always about underhanded influence. It's about prestige. Having a photo op for all your executives to hang on their office wall, or an invitation to a golf outing with the President or a seat at the Kennedy Center or State Dinner or even have Hillary show up at your kids wedding. A wedding present from the President is something to talk about!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Following is a link to a Politico article concerning one of her speeches to Goldman Sachs. Not a transcript, but she has those under lock and key and probably in the same file as the Rose Law Firm billing records.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

What Clinton said in her paid speeches
Recalled one attendee: 'She sounded more like a Goldman Sachs managing director.'
By BEN WHITE
02/09/16 05:15 AM EST
NEW YORK — When Hillary Clinton spoke to Goldman Sachs executives and technology titans at a summit in Arizona in October of 2013, she spoke glowingly of the work the bank was doing raising capital and helping create jobs, according to people who saw her remarks.
Clinton, who received $225,000 for her appearance, praised the diversity of Goldman’s workforce and the prominent roles played by women at the blue-chip investment bank and the tech firms present at the event. She spent no time criticizing Goldman or Wall Street more broadly for its role in the 2008 financial crisis.

Thanks for the story, Chuckd! Surely, if she had said something to the effect, however tactful, that they should clean up their act for everyone's sake, you'd think she would be eager to let everyone know.

I am not challenging you, but merely asking. I have noticed that the article is dated Feb. 9, 2016. I am wondering if, since that time, anything corroborating what this attendee did say has since come up.

There are a few articles here and there in support of this one but they are on blog sites that the liberals would never accept. It's hard for even the most rabid Hillary fan to dispute Politico.

The cover-up of this and other events are what the MSM is implicit in. Any news that might be detrimental to Hillary is simply ignored and never reported on. You see and hear hours and hours of Trump's slips and goofs but nothing about Hillary's persistent coughing attacks, her speech transcripts, payments from investment bankers, possible favoritism to Clinton Foundation donors while she was Secretary of State, her use of a private server or any of the multitude of problems no other candidate could survive.

With all the baggage this woman is carrying around, the main stream media could have buried her candidacy in 24 hours if they only reported some of the facts.

Here are a few examples you will never find on MSM.

http://www.salon.com/2016/04/21/enough_with_the_hillary_cult_her_admirers_ignore_reality_dream_of_worshipping_a_queen/

http://freebeacon.com/issues/state-department-office-removed-benghazi-files-congressional-subpoena/

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2016/02/09/report-hillarys-goldman-sachs-speech-transcripts-would-bury-her-n2116991

Link to comment
Share on other sites

salon . com ?cheesy.gif

Did Secretary Clinton over tip on a manicure?

The smearing gets truly ridiculous, but alas, on the otherside we have Trump and his own words, as opposed to right-whinger hearsay and things that would "bury her candidacy".

Reaching for straws because come November it's going to be a wipeout.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All Presidents and important politicians have a desk piled high with invitations.

Ronald Reagan famously traveled to Japan for a $1million speaking engagement right after he left office. That was big money back then.

It's not always about underhanded influence. It's about prestige. Having a photo op for all your executives to hang on their office wall, or an invitation to a golf outing with the President or a seat at the Kennedy Center or State Dinner or even have Hillary show up at your kids wedding. A wedding present from the President is something to talk about!

"Ronald Reagan famously traveled to Japan for a $1million speaking engagement right after he left office. That was big money back then."

Try to catch up.

The $1 Million that Reagan hauled in pales to insignificance in the face of Hillary's $21.6 Million in just two years after leaving the State Department.

Besides that is the fact Reagan had no intentions to run for another elective office. It looks like Hillary had no such intentions when she made those paid speeches.

Following is a list of all the six figure speeches Hillary made after leaving the State Department. Anybody willing to read it might find it interesting.

http://www.businessinsider.com/here-are-all-the-six-figure-speaking-fees-that-hillary-clinton-received-after-leaving-the-state-dept-2015-5

...and...

http://money.cnn.com/2016/04/20/news/economy/hillary-clinton-goldman-sachs/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

salon . com ?cheesy.gif

Did Secretary Clinton over tip on a manicure?

The smearing gets truly ridiculous, but alas, on the otherside we have Trump and his own words, as opposed to right-whinger hearsay and things that would "bury her candidacy".

Reaching for straws because come November it's going to be a wipeout.

Jingthing links to them sometimes. The cave you live in doesn't cover them?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All Presidents and important politicians have a desk piled high with invitations.

Ronald Reagan famously traveled to Japan for a $1million speaking engagement right after he left office. That was big money back then.

It's not always about underhanded influence. It's about prestige. Having a photo op for all your executives to hang on their office wall, or an invitation to a golf outing with the President or a seat at the Kennedy Center or State Dinner or even have Hillary show up at your kids wedding. A wedding present from the President is something to talk about!

"Ronald Reagan famously traveled to Japan for a $1million speaking engagement right after he left office. That was big money back then."

Try to catch up.

The $1 Million that Reagan hauled in pales to insignificance in the face of Hillary's $21.6 Million in just two years after leaving the State Department.

Besides that is the fact Reagan had no intentions to run for another elective office. It looks like Hillary had no such intentions when she made those paid speeches.

Following is a list of all the six figure speeches Hillary made after leaving the State Department. Anybody willing to read it might find it interesting.

http://www.businessinsider.com/here-are-all-the-six-figure-speaking-fees-that-hillary-clinton-received-after-leaving-the-state-dept-2015-5

...and...

http://money.cnn.com/2016/04/20/news/economy/hillary-clinton-goldman-sachs/

It's OK if Reagan did it.

Silly boy. Turn off the right wing propaganda.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

salon . com ?cheesy.gif

Did Secretary Clinton over tip on a manicure?

The smearing gets truly ridiculous, but alas, on the otherside we have Trump and his own words, as opposed to right-whinger hearsay and things that would "bury her candidacy".

Reaching for straws because come November it's going to be a wipeout.

I think salon.com tends to have a more liberal and left-wing slant to their stories. Although, and I really do not know, maybe they are not overly fond of HRC. I am just guessing that some of them see her as at heart being closer to a Wall St. moderate Republican.

You may want to check out their site. I just checked it out and their lead story is from Seymour Hersh, who I think first became well-known for his My Lai Massacre reporting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

salon . com ?cheesy.gif

Did Secretary Clinton over tip on a manicure?

The smearing gets truly ridiculous, but alas, on the otherside we have Trump and his own words, as opposed to right-whinger hearsay and things that would "bury her candidacy".

Reaching for straws because come November it's going to be a wipeout.

I think salon.com tends to have a more liberal and left-wing slant to their stories. Although, and I really do not know, maybe they are not overly fond of HRC. I am just guessing that some of them see her as at heart being closer to a Wall St. moderate Republican.

You may want to check out their site. I just checked it out and their lead story is from Seymour Hersh, who I think first became well-known for his My Lai Massacre reporting.

Salon is off the wall left wing liberal. That's why I posted it.

I would have thought GOM would have done some research before he attacked the source.

Knee jerk reactions aren't always the best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A bribe is a bribe, is a bribe, is a speech?

What a vile creature!

A paid speaking engagement is a bribe?

hmmm let me guess.., you are a FOX 'news' viewer?

Am I right?

How about gratuity? A gratuity payment is a payment for loyalty. Or inducement, kickback, backhander, pay off, sweetener, payola, even 'carrot'

If you think that payments of 100's of thousands of $$ for a speech is simply a standard fee for reading a speech then pretty much anyone should command that level and you know that's not true.

But when it involves a likely POTUS then it can be nothing else but an upfront gratuity for future considerations no less. It appears unseemly without the help of Fox news

Further when cellphones are not allowed and HRC won't release the transcripts of those speeches then it's obvious it would be incriminating for the electorate to hear their contents when Hillary says she represents the poor.

End of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.








  • Topics

  • Latest posts...

    1. 0

      17 Arrests Made as Pro-Palestinian Protests Sweep London

    2. 0

      Elon Musk Joins Donald Trump in Rally, Energizes Supporters

    3. 0

      Legal Battle Looms over VAT on Private Schools: Parent’s Fight for Special Needs Education

    4. 0

      The Dark Legacy of October 7 The Terror and Tragedy One Year On

    5. 0

      The U.S. Alliance Dilemma: Hezbollah, Iran, and Russia's Connection

    6. 0

      Could an October Surprise Shift the Deadlocked Trump-Harris Race?

    7. 0

      Putin's Nuclear Threats: Rhetoric or Reality?

    8. 0

      White House Rebukes False Claims Amid Hurricane Helene Relief Efforts

    9. 0

      Spreaders of Conspiracy Theories: Unmasking the Motivations Behind the Lies

    10. 0

      Boris Johnson Suggests Putin Would Have Avoided Invading Ukraine if Trump Were President

    11. 0

      Oklahoma’s Controversial Plan to Purchase 55,000 Bibles for Public Schools

    12. 0

      Menendez Brothers’ Convictions to be Revisited Amid New Evidence & Interest

    13. 0

      India’s Debate on Marital Rape: Government Deems Criminalisation ‘Excessively Harsh’

    14. 0

      Rapid Greening of Antarctica: Scientists Alarmed by Climate Change Impact

    15. 3,549

      President Kamala Harris

×
×
  • Create New...