Video surfaces of Hillary Clinton’s paid speech to Goldman Sachs, and it’s completely harmless
With Hillary Clinton now being singled out for having given the same kind of paid speeches during her time out of office that all politicians have generally given when they’ve had career gaps their own, curiosity has arisen as to just what Clinton was telling entities like Goldman Sachs during these speeches. There’s no longer any need to wonder, because video footage has surfaced. As it turns out, Hillary was speaking to Wall Street to try to make the case for gender equity in the business world.
The wild conspiracy theories coming from those who oppose Hillary Clinton in the Presidential election have never made logical sense. If Clinton were preparing to deregulate Wall Street and give the big financial institutions what they want, she would logically already be singing the praises of deregulation in order to soften the ground for it, as the republican candidates are currently doing. There is no such thing as a Presidential candidate running on a platform of Wall Street reform, as Clinton is, and then getting into office and suddenly going the opposite direction.
Nonetheless, supporters of Clinton’s opponent have convinced themselves that her speeches to Wall Street were part of some secret plot against mainstream Americans. Those individuals would do well to watch the actual footage of her speech, which is all about promoting women in entrepreneurial roles. Even when Hillary Clinton was addressing Wall Street, she was pushing for gender equity, not some kind of pro-corporate agenda. Watch her 2014 Goldman Sachs speech below:
Hillary Clinton begins speaking at the 3:50 mark
There is zero pleasing sole people who already have it made up in their mind that this woman is secretly trying to harm us. Listen, people wanted and called for the release of transcripts. When video comes out of a speech that doesn't show what people want to believe, then it's something else. ENOUGH ALREADY! If you don't like her, that's fine. Stop with the incessant character attacks that ultimately prove to be untrue!
Sorry, but as much as all of you Hillbots want to pretend this is proof of her innocence, it's not.
You see, she gave MORE than ONE speech, and isn't it just so dang convenient the ONE speech she gave that WAS innocuous was the ONE speech we get to see.
Oh, and the idiot who wrote this pathetic article needs to be reminded that Obama was saying THE EXACT SAME THINGS CLINTON IS NOW SAYING, and he did NOT take on Wall Street.
Or are you fools honestly going to try and say he did, WHEN NOT ONE BANKER HAS BEEN ARRESTED!
There are 3 speeches, not just this one. So no were not satisfied with %33 of what we were asking for.
It is her character I am most concerned with. That, and her inability to tell the truth.
So you buy GOP lies when it comes to Hillary? If you think she lies. Then you have bought a GOP talking point. You are no Democrat. Anybody who buys GOP lies about Hillary and call themselves a Democrat is a disgrace.
please post a credible source showing her rating higher than sanders regarding her honesty
please post a credible source showing her rating higher than sanders regarding her honesty
She's not "secretly trying to harm us." She's doing right out in the open and extending her middle finger at us while she does it.
Then why won't she release the transcripts? They are harmless right?
I'm sure the speech wasn't 16 minutes long. That would be very short for a 200,000 dollar payment
that would be $12,500 per minute, or $280 per second .... nice work if you can get it
She hasn't made a secret of it.
How do you still believe anything she says. Stand Down, it is only a video protest.
She's a disgusting pig a liar and a criminal
another GOP troll.
Prove it. Come on, now. Let's see your proof. And none of that Fox "news" crap, either.
I think to most the details of her speech aren't the most important factor. It's why she was there, what she was paid, who she spoke to, who she receives donations from now, etc.
250000.00 for 10 minutes . That's 1,500,000.00 an hour. For what?
It's called influence peddling.
If you have to ask, you're too young and innocent to hear.
What about her decades of experience and expertise? If that is only about one hour speech, why they didn't invite you? Are you jealous or illogical?
That's what she's selling.
Your math is terrible because you omitted a few numbers.
You omitted the time it took her to write and practice the speech, which I promise you was at least an hour. You also omitted the time that she spent in her career becoming an expert, literal decades of hard work.
You also omitted that she earned the same as her husband and male Cabinet members. Stop being jealous that the woman got equal pay.
Not just equal pay, but better than many males. I guess many would rather have someone who no one cares what he has to say or is not smart enough to earn so much money as their president. I'm with the smart one, HER.
Did you know that hillary paid her female staffers less?!
What is she expert on?! what has she done except conributing to 7 bills and bombing the whole region of middle east?!
Aided and bag ladied funds contrary to embargo all for a right wing colonialization coup in central america? While @ state. Look up hillary, zelaye, honduras. Take your pick of left or right narrations. They pretty much are the same. Kissinger yhe2nd. Chile, but with lessons learned about how much blood you can expect to get a pass on.
I thought they said that one stipulation to her speeches was absolutely no tapes but only transcripts?????
Agreed. Useless, baseless and cruel character attacks.
http://www.salon.com/2015/06/08/exclusive_hillary_clinton_sold_out_honduras_lanny_davis_corporate_cash_and_the_real_story_about_the_death_of_a_latin_america_democracy/
Youre a liw info know nothing if you belueve your words.
You buy this? this video has been around for years...and its for a womens symposium. WHere are they videos and transcripts of her telling Wall Street to reign it in and threaten them? She claims to have done this numerous times....is this not her golden opportunity to showcase that proof? You really buy the "not until everyone else does" red-herring defense? Besides, bernie just released alll his transcripts....he called her bluff....why hasnt she?
No one wants to pay to hear Bernie.
ummm why don't we let Hillary's mouth do the talking.
Hillary is a chronic pathological liar. To believe otherwise is willful ignorance. Her husband helped to destroy the America we once knew with prisons for profit, NAFTA, welfare reform, repeal of glass steagal, etc. She supported those policies and her 'hard work' went into helping to craft the TPP. Hillary is a lover of POWER and money
If I were supporting Bernie Sanders, I'd be far more concerned with the fact that his articles and essays were published in socialist "newspapers" and readily available. To write that a 16 year old girl should be sexually active (because she's already 3 years past her biological child bearing years) and not listen to what her mother taught her should be great fodder for the GOP: http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/07/bernie-sanders-vermont-freeman-sexual-freedom-fluoride
Exactly! I saw this and she is a liar liar pants on fire!
Changing your mind like most people have is not lying, brainwashed functional morons.
"Changing your mind like most people have is not lying"
But denying that you changed, when it is a recorded fact is a boldfaced lie!
Hillary changes her mind more often than a street pros on her period changes tampons.
So what exactly, except for pandering to her target voters, made her change her mind about LGBT? What did she saw that she had not seen prior to 2012?! Do you think that a senator from Newyork, a former first lady, in her 50s or late forties, has to get educated so she can broaden her horizons?!
The problem is that she wants to be in power, and nobody who lusts for power, is not suited for that role.
Watch the double negative there, But roger that sentiment. Or regime changes, bombing a mans nation who didnt suck imf , and several progressive centralist platform planks her neo liberal right self does not like. Allways gmo though its death to autonomy in food production whether to the eater of not...economic death in india, africa, america. TPP backer still. That will never end, its one of her bigest meal tickets and remember how starved they were after shagging @ white house before.still.
Emad speaks truth.
Emad speaks gibberish.
Changing your mind isn't a lie. Lying about having changed your mind after the fact IS a lie.
Yeah.. I think Hillary's campaign has a habit of leaving people "Behind".
$$$$Paying Clinton most certainly manages risk$$$$
This wasn't one of her paid speeches. The date on the video is Sept 23, 2013. According to her regulatory filings, either she wasn't paid, the foundation was paid independent of her, or she didn't disclose this speech.
So no, this isn't a video of what one of her paid speeches looks like.
I still want to see the real deal.
This was The Clinton global initiative. Not a speech to Goldman Sachs. you are right on the money.
I'm glad she wasn't paid for this one. It was so totally boring, it was only through sheer will power I managed to finish it.
I wish I could make 200,000+ for 10 minutes of work. Hell, I wish i could make 200,000 for 2 years of work. That's what this election is about. And yes, Hillary Clinton, like almost every other politician, is totally corrupt. I will not vote for a corporate candidate. https://citizensagainstplutocracy.wordpress.com/
If I were supporting Bernie Sanders, I'd be far more concerned with the fact that his articles and essays were published in socialist "newspapers" and readily available. To write that a 16 year old girl should be sexually active (because she's already 3 years past her biological child bearing years) and not listen to what her mother taught her should be great fodder for the GOP: http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/07/bernie-sanders-vermont-freeman-sexual-freedom-fluoride
So you probably won't be voting then, eh?
I bet you do! And maybe, just maybe, one day if you work reeeeaaaal hard and get to become a NY Senator and Secretary of State, you can too!
Or you could just sit in mom's basement writing a blog and being pissy. Your call.
You've inadvertently made a point of my biggest fear of an HRC presidency. Look at how a Republican House and Senate have obstructed President Obama and fast forward to January, 2017. The landscape, unchanged, we must now contend with do-nothing legislative bodies for 8-more years-hence, no progress on any of our problems.You can also forget about approving liberal/moderate Supreme Court Justices.
Return of the bananna republics, the hillary years.http://www.salon.com/2015/06/08/exclusive_hillary_clinton_sold_out_honduras_lanny_davis_corporate_cash_and_the_real_story_about_the_death_of_a_latin_america_democracy/
That is not because of Congress. It is because Obummer is a tyrant and NOT a leader. He reminds me of a black bully I was unfortunate enough to work for years ago. No ability or desire to negotiate.
Most likely the black "bully" was the unfortunate one for having to put up with your KKK ass.
Ya can't negotiate with assholes who have already made up their minds in terms of trying to destroy you numbnuts.
Like HRC or not, we can't afford to have a Republican in the White House. They have for years tried to end SS, Medicare and any other program that benefits the American people. We also have to consider the Supreme Court appointees. Do you really want more of what gave us Citizens United? While a Democratic President may not be able to accomplish what we'd want him/her to do, you can bet your last dollar they will be out to do a lot of harm if they have all three branches of government.
If Sanders wins the primary, according to the latest polls done by realclearpolitics, he beats Trump by a larger margin than Hillary does and beats Cruz while Hillary loses to Cruz. AKA we are risking a Republican presidency by giving Clinton the nomination. So sick of hearing people refer to Clinton as the "safe option." DO YOUR RESEARCH.
Real Clear Politics Monday Feb. 8, 2016
General Election: Trump vs. Clinton PPP (D) Clinton 47, Trump 40 Clinton +7
General Election: Trump vs. Sanders PPP (D) Sanders 46,
Trump 42 Sanders +4
General Election: Cruz vs. Clinton PPP (D) Cruz 44, Clinton 46 Clinton +2
General Election: Cruz vs. Sanders PPP (D) Sanders 44, Cruz 42 Sanders +2
and that would be different with Sanders?
He has a political revolution following him that is dedicated to voting in other levels of government as well. Hillary doesn't have that excited dedicated following to push through.
you call a bunch of greedy entitled kids being suckered into communism a ''political revolution''?
Then lets see all the speeches. Not the blurb she released to the media, and which the media complied by writing a nice article about...
You are a fool TJ. These 'character attacks' are justified and legitimate.
I wouldn't say she's secretly trying to harm us. Its not really a secret by any stretch.
Only one speech? Only one topic (women as business executives)?
Oh yeah? Want to see how Wall Street infleunces Hillarys decisiosn? Watch this
Please, old news, Clinton put through a bill that would pass, and got as much as she could from it. EW was not in the Senate at the time, if she were, she would not be so nieve. I'll bet Sanders voted with her on that vote.
And EW has walked back that criticism of Hillary. She did not vote for the final version of the bill. She supported the filibuster against it.Clinton, in fact, worked with other members of congress to include amendments that addressed Elizabeth Warren’s concerns. And the bill passed 83–15. Maybe Warren didn’t feel these amendments went far enough (but if that were true, why not mention that?) For whatever reason, the story Warren tells in this interview is incomplete. Clinton’s position on this bill was no different than that uber-conservative, Barbara Boxer.
Here’s what happened next — the bill went to the Republican controlled congress, they stripped out those amendments, sent the bill back to the senate, the Democrats filibustered the bill, and Clinton voted to uphold the filibuster. Another version of the bill later passed that Hillary opposed. So that woman Warren describes in the first part of her interview — the woman who “really gets it” — turns out that woman never changed after all (and currently, Warren speaks very highly of Hillary).
You'd lose that bet.
I'll bet she can spell naive.
mic drop
so you are saying when all senators including Bernie or Elizabeth have a vote that can be scrutinized it's because they are bought? Because I can assure you none of them has a perfect voting record.
That's true, but if you actually look at the recorded votes of your Senators and Congressman, you may feel a bit of betrayal at how many times they voted with Republicans. Especially on fiscal deprivation and sabotage issues.
That Moyers interview is from 2004 -- old stuff. In 2014 Elizabeth Warren and other female senators signed a letter urging Hillary to run for President.
Here, Oli, you can bebefit from one of these:
http://zapatopi.net/afdb/
That Moyers interview is from 2004 -- old stuff. In 2014 Elizabeth Warren and other female senators signed a letter urging Hillary to run for President.
So when she was the senator from new York she was influenced by the financial sector, which is the biggest employer in the state and the core of its economy? Shocking. Next you will tell me that a senator from Michigan has the back of the auto industry. It is easier to take principled positions when you represent a state with 23 people in it and the economy consists of skiing, cheese, and maple syrup.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/9/22/1423815/-Something-I-Heard-About-Hillary-Clinton-is-Untrue-The-Bankruptcy-Bill-Edition
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/9/22/1423815/-Something-I-Heard-About-Hillary-Clinton-is-Untrue-The-Bankruptcy-Bill-Edition
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/9/22/1423815/-Something-I-Heard-About-Hillary-Clinton-is-Untrue-The-Bankruptcy-Bill-Edition
So, you think this speech is worth $225,000? Many of my students could give better speeches than this! This is supposed to be a person who is a professional speech-giver and yet EVERY sentence/statement has the 'word' "err" in it! Really? No, there are three questions that come from this: 1) why has this video been made available now? Why not before now? 2) why isn't it a complete video? It is listed that the 'speeches' Hillary gave were 40 minutes long - this video is only half that length. 3) If this truly is a representation of her speeches, a speech that isn't worth more than a few thousand, why did she insist on a fee of $225K+ for each speech?...
Really! Release the transcripts than we will decide. However the real issue is Wall Street purchasing politicians.
They are so here's an example
What right do we have to demand to see transcripts of speeches she made as a private citizen? Why aren't these same demands made to all other Presidential candidates on the speaker circuit? Why aren't we demanding for meeting minutes that Republicans have had with the Koch Brothers, when they accepted donations from them? Fees were paid to her as a private citizen. The check has been cashed, she's not beholden to them.
As a GS shareholder, and one of the owners of this public company, we have a right to see what this expense bought.
Kind of like medical records?
Because she's not a private citizen
because she is applying for president, and has her unlikely future boss I want to know. The president works for the people and we demand to know who her alliances are.
you can run silly hilly, but you can't hide. Release the transcripts!
Bernie or Bust '16 - 'cause anything less is business has usual...
We have every right to demand this as citizens and we are requesting this from Republicans as well. It's just that the Republicans are loud and proud about their big corp affiliations.
I have a bridge to sell you bumpkins who think Goldman Sachs gives you hundreds of thousands of dollars and don't expect anything in return. Hillary gets invited to speak to them because she is one of them.
Because I don't, ....no CAN'T trust her as a politician....that's why I don't trust what she does behind closed doors.....I suspect...and this has been demonstrated by her interaction with Elizabeth Warren regarding the bankruptcy debacle and her conducting politics on a private email. Her boundaries there are really blurry.
You are as naive and clueless as they come TJ. A perfect Shillary supporter!!
If this was what most of her speeches were like, she'd have released them already. If she had nothing to hide, why would she have had to "look into it"?
You don't release for free what you get paid handsmly to give - just good busness pracice - doesn't i dicate anything nefarious.
when you run for the most powerfull position on earth...i beg to differ
bullshit
Because she is right in being angry at being singled out. Nobody is calling for any of the other candidates to release a transcript of every speech they've made. If it's not a requirement for the men, why should it be for her?
Lol. Perfect, let all of them release their transcripts. I'm sure Bernie won't have a problem releasing his paid speeches that he made $600 on and then donated to charity
Bernie Sanders made those speeches as a sitting senator, not a private citizen.
You are not a private citizen when you are part of a GLOBAL Initiative that rakes in lots of donations from all PARTS of the world... IMHO
She's running for President; they're not.
Probably because some people would pounce on her for some imagined misstatement of fact. Not like it hasn't happened before.
This is a GS 10,000 Women annual dinner at the Clinton Global Initiative HQ. This is quite different from other speeches where she speaks to company owners & maj shareholders & takes questions from execs (google "Lucrative side business: Hillary Clinton" @ Daily Mail). The next month, she gave 2 speeches @ GS presumably on insane global-econ rather than an annual dinner specifically for women's initiatives. Zerohedge has the enormous list of these speeches.
Keep in mind the editor of The Nation magazine was compelled to mention Clinton was 'ill-equipped' to speak at events centering on finance and the business world.
this video apparently has been on You Tube for a couple of years...so nothing has been released yet...not that it will matter one way another for people who have obviously already made up their minds...
This is a GS 10,000 Women annual dinner:
http://www.goldmansachs.com/citizenship/10000women/
This is (very) opposed to other speeches where she speaks to owners & maj shareholders & takes questions from execs:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2482262/Hillary-Clinton-nets-400K-2-speeches-Goldman-Sachs.html
The next month, she gave 2 speeches @ GS presumably on insane global-econ rather than a specific event for women (at the Clinton Global Initiative HQ):
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-08-03/every-hillary-and-bill-clinton-speech-2013-fees
Please keep in mind the editor of The Nation made it a point to mention she was 'ill-equipped' to speak at events centering on finance and the business world.
It not that she's secretly trying to harm us, is that she is unknowingly harming us. She has the support of Wall Street and the oligarchs, what more do you need to know?
What a sham. We want the transcripts of the PRIVATE speeches. This is no the same. This article is establishment garbage.
I find it fascinating that she was a private citizen (not at all in any government capacity), privately employed and people believe they are entitled to know exactly what she said. Problem here is that many of the Presidential hopefuls, now and in the past, have made speeches to private companies yet only Hillary is asked for transcripts. It seems she's held to a different standard at all times.