February 9, 2016

"It was like a rah-rah speech. She sounded more like a Goldman Sachs managing director."

"It was pretty glowing about us... It’s so far from what she sounds like as a candidate now."

80 comments:

traditionalguy said...

Hillary is a female John Dillinger. She goes where the money is kept.

You really can't blame a working girl who left the White House broke...and they offered to buy her.

Jason said...

.... And Elizabeth Warren and Joe Biden are both getting up and taking their jackets off in the bullpen!

tim in vermont said...

Clinton spokesman Brian Fallon dismissed the recollections as “pure trolling,” while the Clinton campaign declined to comment further on calls that she release the transcripts of the three paid speeches she gave to Goldman Sachs, for which she earned a total of $675,000.

Comedy gold!

Big Mike said...

@Jason, Ol' Lonesome Joe Biden is a pervert and Dr. Warren is a corrupt fraud. That's quite a bullpen the Dumbocrats have!

Dan Hossley said...

Two things could go wrong here. First, she could have promised to be Wall Streets best friend, etc. Second, she could have said absolutely nothing interesting...mindless blather.

In the first case, she'll get blasted for being on Wall Street's payroll. In the second, it's a prima facia case of bribery.

hawkeyedjb said...

I like how Hillary! says the state department should release all her top-secret emails but we can't get a sniff of those Goldman Sachs talks. There's secrets, and then there's important secrets.

tim in vermont said...

Bernie's on fire and Hillary is in flames.

hawkeyedjb said...

Putin probably has the transcripts.

Original Mike said...

Hillary whines about ‘double standard’ in being asked to release Goldman Sachs transcripts

"I’m getting a little bit weary of the double standard. Let’s release what everybody has ever said. There are a lot of people on both sides. If we’re going to start saying what you did when you were out of office, when you were in the private sector, what you did — fair game, release it all. I’m all for that.”

Sure you are, Hillary. Sure you are.

Notice how she calls on people "on both sides", since it wouldn't work for her to just call on Sanders.

Virgil Hilts said...

That's what they offered - debunked by Puffington Host:
"Hillary is veering from the truth when she suggests her $225,000 per speech fee, paid three times by Goldman Sachs, was "what they offered." . . . It was not what they offered -- it was what Team Hillary demanded. A review of her 2014 tax return posted on her website shows that $225,000 was her minimum fee. She received $225,000 for 34 of the 41 speeches listed on her tax return. Of the remaining 7 speeches, two were for 250,000 and the others for $265,000, $275,000, $285,000, $305,000 and $400,000. In total she received $9,680,000 for these speaking engagements in 2013."
I'm really shocked that Hillary was not honest with the American people about this!

Terry said...

You would think that at some point Hillary would reflect on what it means that lying or withholding information is always better for her than simply telling the truth.
That would only require a Sunday-school level of moral reasoning.

tim in vermont said...

Yeah, Bernie can release the transcripts of that time he visited the small engine repair shop in Fair Haven, Vermont and commiserated with the proprietor on the effects of ethanol on old outboards!

Chuck said...

I have mixed emotions on this.

Of course Mrs. Clinton is just saying whatever it takes to win the nomination now. Just like she said she was against same sex marriage when she had to, and now that she's saying that Republicans are now bigots for failing to change their views, circa 2012, like she did.

It is coldly calculating. Not even worth any pretense.

My mix of emotions are (a) Haha, yet another Clinton position-shift for political expediency; (b) I might actually have found her Goldman speech (if it were written by Bill and his team) to have been worth listening to; (c) it would be better, if Bernie Sanders got the nomination. Because Bernie Sanders is not going to win a general election. So I don't know if I prefer "Hillary Clinton, liar and hypocrite," or "Hillary Clinton, moderate Democrat."

HoodlumDoodlum said...

Holy shit, you mean when you're paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to speak before a group you adopt a warm tone and conspicuously shy away from directly attacking that group? Who'd-a thunk it?

Am I the only one who thinks it's a lil' sexist for the Media to actual give a damn about finding out what Candidate Clinton said at some earlier function when they very pointedly did NOT give a damn about what Candidate Obama said at some earlier function? Tsk tsk tsk, sexist Democrat journalists!

HoodlumDoodlum said...

Don't forget now, she and Bill had such burdensome bills to pay when they left the White House (penniless!) that she was really forced into accepting these high paid speaking engagements from anyone who'd put up the money. Oh, are we not going with that defense anymore?
Nevermind.

Terry said...

Elizabeth Warren on Trump:
"There are a lot of places where he gets out and talks about important things," Warren said during an appearance on "The View." "Donald Trump and I both agree that there ought to be more taxation of the billionaires, the people who are making their money on Wall Street."

Trump on Elizabeth Warren:
“[She] doesn’t want to see the country lose 400 billion dollars a year to China in terms of deficit.”

National Review's Kevin Williams on Trump:
"Trump’s performance-art character is butch in the sense that certain gay icons are butch — bikers, cowboys, and the rest of the Village People — and appealing to certain men for similar reasons, one of which is overcompensation for threats against their virility."

And Williams on Elizabeth Warren:
"Herself’s invocation of serfdom is the logical extension of “You Didn’t Build That”-ism, the backward philosophy under which the free citizen is obliged to justify his life and his prosperity to the state, in order to satisfy the economic self-interest, status-seeking, and power-lust of such lamentable specimens as Elizabeth Warren, a ridiculous little scold who has never done a single useful thing in her entire public life."

A conservative should vote for whomever Williams votes for.

MadisonMan said...

I’m getting a little bit weary

So, she admits to being weary!

Don't you think she looks tired?

jacksonjay said...

Clearly another attack by the VRWC. They have been after poor Hillary for 30 years and will continue to pursue this dedicated public servant forever! Whenever will it end?

Next thing you know, they will accuse her of murder.

AReasonableMan said...

Do the senators for Ohio criticize Johnson & Johnson? Why would the former senator for NY criticize Wall St, the main source of economic growth in NY. It is not exactly unusual for a state's senator or former senator to be supportive of the state's major industry. I haven't heard Gillibrand or Schumer criticize Wall Street either. Personally I think Matt Taibbi's description of GS as - "a great vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity, relentlessly jamming its blood funnel into anything that smells like money." - is pretty accurate, but I don't have to answer for NY state's economic performance.

Original Mike said...

ARM: purposefully obtuse, as usual.

eric said...

If you pay me enough I'll get up and say nice things about you to.

Mac McConnell said...

Hillary performing grifterlingus on Goldman Sachs for cash.

Quaestor said...

I wonder why Althouse didn't use her "Hillary's in trouble" tag on this one? Is it applicable, or has it collapsed and died in harness like an overworked plough horse?

Beldar said...

It doesn't matter what she said in the speeches.

The speeches are only excuses for the speaking fee. She didn't write the speeches herself, she likely barely skimmed them before delivering them.

Suppose they say something that's 100% different than what she says today on the campaign trail.

A Clinton caught in a contradiction? That's supposed to be news?

No one except Bill & Hill themselves even bother to keep a straight face anymore when arguing that Hillary Clinton is truthful and trustworthy. She's going to lose in NH tonight, and she'll continue to alienate everyone in the Democratic Party who's now backing Bernie.

But she's going to win the Dem nomination.

ngtrains said...

I suppose senator from Ohio might critic J&J

It;s a NJ company

Bushman of the Kohlrabi said...

When you're dead broke, you do what you have to do.

David Begley said...

Mrs. Ted Cruz worked at Goldman Sachs in October 2013. Happy to hear Hillary thinks highly of Heidi.

Original Mike said...

Heh.

vanderleun said...

"Hillary is a female John Dillinger. She goes where the money is kept."

Get back to us when she's gunned down in the streets by Federal Agents. (Hey, even the Secret Service can only take so much abuse.)

Skeptical Voter said...

Hey it's always true that where you stand upon any issue depends upon where you sit. And when you're sitting in a nice comfy chair in a Goldman Sachs conference room and they're about to hand you a $225K check just for an opportunity to gaze upon your ugly mug {Hillary I'm talking about you], well naturally you make nice.

Now when you're sitting up in a candidate's forum freezing your tushes off in New Hampshire, well then Goldman Sachs isn't so nice. And you'll say bad things about them---until the next time you're sitting in a nice comfy chair in a warm Goldman Sachs conference getting ready to scarf down another $225 K check.

We know what Hillary is--and it looks like Goldman Sachs has established the price.

Skeptical Voter said...

Gol dang---Virgil Hits says Hillary gave Goldman Sachs a discount on her usual speaking fee? Now I know that it's really true that Jesus saves, but Moses invests. You go Goldman Sachs---knocking down the old bawds speaking fee! Well maybe she gave you a volume discount because you were going to buy three.

AReasonableMan said...

ngtrains said...
I suppose senator from Ohio might critic J&J
It;s a NJ company


You are right, I was thinking of Procter & Gamble, but given the overlapping interests of the two firms, still unlikely.

MikeR said...

Whoa, (OT) - Supreme Court stays EPA http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-court-obama-climate-change-20160209-story.html

The Godfather said...

HoodlumDoodlum (4:31 pm) said, "Am I the only one who thinks it's a lil' sexist for the Media to actual give a damn about finding out what Candidate Clinton said at some earlier function . . . ." I think/hope you're kidding.

I figure the Hillary! plan is to keep the GS transcripts under wraps until she has the Democratic nomination wrapped up, then she'll release them as part of her pivot to the middle.

But this won't happen, because she will be forced to drop out of the nomination race as part of her plea bargain with DOJ, clearing the way for the nomination of Joe Biden, who is squeaky clean. It's desperately important for Hillary! to defeat Sanders, because if he wins a majority of delegates, she's got nothing to use for her plea bargain.

Bay Area Guy said...

it's fascinating to see the dissolution of the "Praetorian Guard." Nothing happening to Hillary these days is any worse or different than what happened to her 23 years ago (Whitewater, Lewinksy, blue dress, cattle futures, etc, etc.)

The difference is that the mainstream media no longer effectively serves as her "Praetorian Guard" -- so she takes all these hits, that she's not used to taking.

I love it.

I hope Bernie cleans her clock tonight. And, I hope he can somehow sustain it thru the SEC primary on March 1.

Original Mike said...

Now, in a letter dated February 2 and filed in court Monday, the FBI’s general counsel, James Baker, notes that in public statements and congressional testimony, the FBI “has acknowledged generally that it is working on matters related to former Secretary Clinton’s use of a private email server.”

Michael K said...

TheHillary speeches are of interest to the left.

Her e-mail server is of interest to the United States of America.

I hop this is not a squirrel for the left to ignore the espionage value of her recklessness.

Original Mike said...

"I hop this is not a squirrel for the left to ignore the espionage value of her recklessness."

They don't ignore it. They think her email server is an "illegitimate" issue.

Michael said...

ARM

You do not have the slightest idea of what Goldman Sachs does.

mccullough said...

Sanders is defining the issues in the Democratic primary. He's going after her for the GS money and her support for war in the Middle East.

Primary voters in either party aren't very understanding about nuance. Unfortunately for Hillary she doesn't have 2 people competing in the fuck Wall Street fuck War lane.

Bill, Republic of Texas said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Bill, Republic of Texas said...

@ARM

Isn't Goldman Sachs a NJ company like J&J:) I think their offices are across the river

Bruce Hayden said...

Why is this important? Because the Occupy movement was aimed at companies like Goldman Sachs (and, not where it should have been aimed, which was Wash., D.C., where they had only a handful of tents). Occupy Central was NYC. A lot of the young Democrats in NH who might vote in this primary either were there, know someone who was there, or at least sympathized with those who were protesting. Or, think that they should have been. In any case, Goldman Sachs is the enemy, and being in bed with the enemy is bad, and it is really bad in this case. The real transcripts would make clear that she really is in bed with the enemy, and only trash talking companies like Goldman Sachs for votes.

Titus said...

shocking-not

tits

garage mahal said...

They don't ignore it. They think her email server is an "illegitimate" issue.

It's a much bigger issue for Dem voters than Walker's server was with Republican. In fact, I have never seen a Republican raise an issue with Walker's server.

Michael said...

Garage

You never disappoint. The device in walkers office was what is known as a router. Not the same as a server. But you have confused this from the beginning. Priceless.
Plus i am prtty sure he wasnt sending state secrets over the internets
But maybe its all the same in stupidworld.

damikesc said...

Did Walker have emails above top secret on his?

garage mahal said...

But maybe its all the same in stupidworld.

Oh come on. You don't give a flying fuck what emails Hillary sent, how they were sent, or who they were sent to. You care that Hillary was involved. And before you accuse someone of being stupid, perhaps run a grammar and spellcheck on the chicken scratch you write before hitting send.

Michael said...

Garage

You are quite wrong. Not in favor of going out of bounds on security as she did. Lesser people have been prosecuted for lesser infractions and in the business world fired. What she did was reckless and quite frankly baffling.

Let me know what was not grammatical in my "chicken scratch." Perhaps I left a period off after the word "internets." Although I also see that the letter e is missing from "pretty" and the i should be capitalized. All of which you would have caught given your facility with language and I thank you for point it out. But I don't use grammar or spelling checks because I don't need to, especially on forums like this.

But you must admit that your ongoing confusion regarding servers and routers is of great entertainment value. Priceless actually.

AReasonableMan said...

Michael said...
You do not have the slightest idea of what Goldman Sachs does.


I always love these kinds of comments. Why don't you tell us what GS does? It doesn't have to be long or detailed but in layman's language give us your understanding of GS's essential roles in society. For extra points explain why the compensation of many of their employee's is so much greater than that of people who do unarguably productive work.

tim in vermont said...

I worked for a while at a site that also had a state government contract. I was required to use separate comm technologies since I was not doing state business. If they didn't have those separate routers, they would have been guilty of using state resources illegally.

It's a catcha twenty two!

tim in vermont said...

is "unarguably" a word? I thought it was "inarguably"... My browser says no, but Merriam Webster on-line says they are both right. Like grey and gray. Well one is more elegant.

Ctmom4 said...

This : "Clinton also has some history with the shadow-banking world she says is a continuing risk to the financial system. While in the Senate, she made a little-noticed overture to Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, who was involved in talks to rescue giant insurer AIG with government funds. She was calling on behalf of wealthy investors who stood to lose millions and had hired two longtime Clinton associates to represent them.
politico.com/magazine/story/2015/11/hillary-clinton-told-wall-street-to-cut-it-out-not-so-much-the-record-shows-213363#ixzz3zj1wtIsd

And: "Clinton gave a shout-out to her “wonderful donors” in the audience, and asked the bankers to voluntarily suspend foreclosures and freeze interest rates on adjustable subprime mortgages. She praised Wall Street for its role in creating the nation’s wealth, then added that “too many American families are not sharing” in that prosperity.
She said the brewing economic troubles weren’t mainly the fault of banks, “not by a long shot,” but added they needed to shoulder responsibility for their role. While there was plenty of blame to go around for the spate of reckless lending, and while Wall Street may not have created the foreclosure crisis, it “certainly had a hand in making it worse” and “needs to help us solve it.”
politico.com/magazine/story/2015/11/hillary-clinton-told-wall-street-to-cut-it-out-not-so-much-the-record-shows-213363#ixzz3zj2DP84R

From a 2007 talk to the NASDAQ- that alone would be heresy enough to the left, I think. Odd it hasn't gotten more traction. Troubles not mainly the fault of Wall Street?Burn the witch!

cubanbob said...

As of 8.50 pm EST Hillary has been beaten like a rented mule.

The Cracker Emcee said...

ARM,

Is it usual for the industry to give the politician $675,000 in cash? If you're going to spend the next several months making excuses for Hillary you're going to need to be much, much more inventive.

Drago said...

garage mahal: "Oh come on. You don't give a flying fuck what emails Hillary sent, how they were sent, or who they were sent to."

This is how garage subtly admits that he did not and still does not understand the difference between a router and a server.

And then, in further desperation, goes the always powerful -you have a typo!- counter-attack!.

I'm afraid this is a full representation of the "logic arsenal" available to garage.

Drago said...

ARM: "Why don't you tell us what GS does?"

Scores lots of baskets?

Drago said...

ARM: "I always love these kinds of comments."

You know ARM, I'm sensing that you actually only "like" these kinds of comments.

cubanbob said...

Whatever happened to America's Politico? I was hoping he would show up here and tell us about the inevitability of the Hillary! win.

Drago said...

cubanbob: "Whatever happened to America's Politico? I was hoping he would show up here and tell us about the inevitability of the Hillary! win."

I'm afraid he's been schlonged.

And not in a "good way".

John said...

Speaking of bullpens, I filed my form 2 last week as a Democrat Party candidate. It will probably take a week or 2 to make it up on the FEC website.

Campaign slogan #1 "Never been indicted!"

Campaign slogan #2 "Not socialist, not progressive: Liberal"

Opinions on which is better are welcome.

I might also point out that I am not now and never have been under investigation by the FBI for anything. As far as I know.

I've got to get the website up but for the moment you can send your cash to John Henry, PO Box 1128, Fajardo PR 00738

No blankets, no water. Just send your cash.

John Henry

AReasonableMan said...

Drago said...
You know ARM, I'm sensing that you actually only "like" these kinds of comments.


I'm just trying to make him feel wanted.


tim in vermont said...

I always figured that America's Politico and Once Written were Rove MOBYs here to gin up Republican turnout.

John said...

For those who might say "But John, you are not a Democrat." I would reply that neither is Bernie Sanders. I identify as a Democrat and am at least as much of a Democrat as Glamour's woman of the year is a woman.

Voten por yo!

John Henry

John said...

Trad Guy:

Hilary is no John Dillinger. Unless you want to count her strap-on.

John Henry

John said...

I have been saying for a year or more in various venues that I do not see Hilary dropping out no matter how badly she does. Sanders could beat her 90/10 and she will just say "Oh, he is from a neighboring state." BilliJeff was already saying that a week or two back.

I think the only way that she quits is if she has another stroke or BilliJeff has a heart attack or the like. They don't have to be real, they just have to look real.

John Henry

Drago said...

ARM: "I'm just trying to make him feel wanted."

I knew it!

Typical guy. Always leading someone on.

It's important to reserve that sort of behavior for the ladies. Let's call it "pulling a Steinem". Just for fun.

Drago said...

Back on topic, I'm simply shocked to see that Hillary! is campaigning along lines diametrically opposite of her personal (and profitable) life.

It's so unexpected.

PB said...

See the picture of the US flags piled in a heap on the floor of Clinton campaign offices? Oh, that'll play well down south.

BN said...

Hillary/Bernie (whatever) and Trump.

Sorry. I can't top that. No wonder humor is dead.

BN said...

New Hampshire! What? That's a place?

jacksonjay said...

Democrats down South care about Skittles and Hand Up, Don't Shoot, not Old Glory. Hills won't win any electoral votes there either.

Saint Croix said...

Oh come on. You don't give a flying fuck what emails Hillary sent, how they were sent, or who they were sent to

I think that describes the Democrat reaction. We even see this attitude in many media outlets. But there's a lot of blood in the water, and so non-affiliated reporters, or (gasp!) Republican journalists, are getting the headlines. So liberal journalists, like the Washington Post editorial board, are forced to cover the story.

Do you not see the panic in the editorial board, begging the FBI to hurry up with its investigation? Don't drag it out! It will hurt the campaign! Just the investigation of serious felonies hurts the campaign.

I think a great deal of the love for the old stupid socialist is revulsion at Hillary Clinton. Young people in particular suspect her of being unethical and corrupt. Bernie hasn't used the e-mails at all. He's dismissed the relevance, too! And yet the FBI investigation just dovetails into the political argument that she is untrustworthy, secretive, and malign.

Last night a buddy of mine, big liberal, wanted to talk about New Hampshire. I asked him my usual smartass question. "Are you voting for the socialist or the felon?" His response was, "Hillary hasn't been convicted. Hillary hasn't been indicted. I wish Joe Biden was in the race." Which is pretty much what you are saying to yourself, am I right?

So, sure, accuse the Republicans of being gleeful that the Democrat candidates are so awful. It's true! And, like you, we don't know the extent of how bad her crimes were, or how damaging they were to national security. Because the damn e-mails are classified and are still classified and will always be classified.

Saint Croix said...

60% of New Hampshire voted for the anti-Hillary. How bad a candidate is she, to be losing to a 74-year-old joke of a socialist? (And my smartass question for fans of socialism, "national or international?")

I would be asking him questions like, "Have you read Karl Marx? What do you think of him? Does he influence your politics?" In fact it's kind of insane that people aren't asking him these questions now. Why isn't HIllary asking these questions? (Answer: if she goes negative, he goes negative).

I think both the Democrat party and their journalist sympathizers are in a state of shock.

Rusty said...

AReasonableMan said...
Michael said...
You do not have the slightest idea of what Goldman Sachs does.

I always love these kinds of comments. Why don't you tell us what GS does? It doesn't have to be long or detailed but in layman's language give us your understanding of GS's essential roles in society. For extra points explain why the compensation of many of their employee's is so much greater than that of people who do unarguably productive work.

I got a better idea.
Why don't you tell us.

Brando said...

This all shows how tone deaf Hillary's team is. Of COURSE she said nice things to the people who paid her to speak to them! Only an idiot would believe she was paid repeatedly to talk to such people and took those opportunities to speak truth to power and tell them they need to serve the people and give up their lust for profits.

A non-stupid Hillary would own this, and just say "look, I'm close with Wall Street, because it's important to know how they work if you're going to regulate them. If we barge in like a bull in a china shop we're going to crush a major industry that is essential to our economy, and do nothing for the little guy. But if we have a cordial relationship with them, and understand what regulation will work, we can actually achieve something that aged radical Sanders can only dream of in his wild-eyed imagination."

Of course, in today's Democratic party you can't say something like that. But at least preach the last minute conversion--it worked for Trump.

Mike said...

Drip drip drip

Bruce Hayden said...

I think a great deal of the love for the old stupid socialist is revulsion at Hillary Clinton. Young people in particular suspect her of being unethical and corrupt. Bernie hasn't used the e-mails at all. He's dismissed the relevance, too! And yet the FBI investigation just dovetails into the political argument that she is untrustworthy, secretive, and malign.

I think that the revulsion is correct. What is there to like? Her having a vagina that she used once? Half the population have vaginas, and most vagina owners use them a lot more than Hillary probably did. She is everything that people, and esp. young voters, hate most about politicians. She is the furthest thing from authentic. She sold foreign policy for personal profit, when she was Secretary of State, and that brings up the question of what she would do for personal profit if she got the entire federal government under her control. She has lied or cheated the last maybe 3 1/2 decades, at a minimum (taking $99,000 in bribes for her husband in the guise of commodity trades), up to the present. She is an inveterate liar, but not nearly as good at it as her husband was. Etc. Her unauthenticity is enough to turn off a large percentage of the younger generations.

And, that is probably a lot of why they like Sanders. Not for his economic theories, but for his authenticity. He obviously believes the nonsense that he espouses. He isn't in it for the money, and hasn't accumulated a hundred million dollars directly, and another billion or so under control over his career, like the Clintons have, in their decades of "public service". If you actually had him over for beer, you might end up in yelling match with him over his silly economic theories and the like, but you won't have to count the silver, as you would with Hillary. And, you won't have to hire private security guards to protect your life, if you cross him, like you might with her. He is what he seems, and how he portrays himself. She is a greedy vindictive screw, who tries to portray herself as a noble feminist, etc.

Robert Cook said...

"...Dr. Warren is a corrupt fraud."

How is she a corrupt fraud?

Bruce Hayden said...

Among other things, Warren claimed to be partially (American) Indian, and rode that to tenure at multiple law schools, and, ultimately to Harvard. She didn't have the scholarship, or really, the brains, to probably have become tenured at even her first school, and definitely not Harvard, absent that extreme form of affirmative action. Then, she admitted that she wasn't, and pretended like it wasn't her fault that these schools got carried away, claiming to the world that she was their Indian scholar. And, yes, like Hillary, she talks the talk about reining in big financial institutions, then takes their money.