Justin Sullivan/Getty Images Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton earned $675,000 for three speeches in front of Goldman Sachs employees.
Advertisement
Hillary Clinton looks on as Goldman Sachs CEO speaks at the Clinton Global Initiative, Sept. 24, 2014.
I struggle to imagine that someone as savvy and political – and politically savvy – as Clinton would do anything even close to that. “She sounded more like a Goldman Sachs managing director”.
Clinton has been pressed to released the transcripts of her speeches to Goldman Sachs for the sake of transparency.
But who is the real “Artful Dodger” in this campaign?
About half of 17 Clinton donors contacted by Reuters on Wednesday said they felt she needed to project more of her personality in intimate settings, showing the “warm, genuine affable, and funny” person they know. Then, at the #DemDebate in New Hampshire, she said she would “look into” releasing the speeches.
“Other news organization have asked for copies as well”. The big banks and Wall Street are heavily invested in the Democrat Party.
“I think it matters who is at the top of the ticket”, he went on. He’s not challenging Clinton because he thinks she rigged the game; he simply contends that she is playing it like everyone else in politics.
That became clear when ProPublica, an independent, public service investigative group, obtained a video of her 28-minute speech, it found that she had “steered a middle ground” in her talk to Wall Street executives on December 5, 2007, at the Nasdaq stock market.
Sanders said that it would be a good idea for her to release the transcripts, but that it was her decision. Her Goldman gold is at issue because she is claiming to be a crusader against the very Wall Street fat cats she has gotten rich off of.
“Speaking fee question awkward terrain”, Mr. Axelrod said in a recent tweet. Clinton won by the narrowest of margins, but she snagged the support of six extra superdelegates.
“Hillary is like a veteran actor who doesn’t audition well”.
‘I would have been prepared for her to lose the first two states because they were so favorable to Bernie Sanders, ‘ said Carrin Patman, a partner at Houston law firm Bracewell who has raised $250,000 for Clinton.
At Thursday night’s Democratic debate in New Hampshire, Clinton was asked again whether she would release the speeches, with moderator Chuck Todd relaying a question that had been sent in, and then expanding the question, asking Clinton whether she would release the transcripts to every one of her paid speeches. As with Clinton’s emails, the issue is not the content in question so much as the way she has handled it, and her knee-jerk resistance to transparency.
Advertisement
At the time, and increasingly as the months wore on, she was considered a likely prospect to run for president, despite the fact she said little to tip her hand publicly on whether she would. It was so badly designed under the cloak of secrecy that Democrats refused to bring it up for a vote. “She worked for the Children’s Defense Fund”. That would have meant perhaps surrendering part of the populist base, but it would have enhanced her credibility with the center-Left and independents that she will need in a general election – assuming she makes it that far. This was always going to be a problem for her in a Democratic nomination race, but it’s especially burdensome when her opponent is Bernie Sanders.
