Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
73 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Bernie reminds everyone about the $600,000.00 Hillary got from Goldman Sachs for speeches!!! (Original Post) ViseGrip Jan 2016 OP
And got booed by the audience. Agschmid Jan 2016 #1
got booed... thomservo Jan 2016 #4
Probably a plant CoffeeCat Jan 2016 #51
Of course-any opposition to Sanders MUST be a plant, since no one could ever disagree with him ever! Empowerer Jan 2016 #58
the boo from that one lone soul retrowire Jan 2016 #26
That's what I thought too. JimDandy Jan 2016 #31
He was saying "Boo-ernie!" nxylas Jan 2016 #39
Well, that's definitely some spin. It could have been a banker that did it. stillwaiting Jan 2016 #49
Got booed....lol! Segami Jan 2016 #57
Getting money from speeches is different from politics, this was pay for her services. Thinkingabout Jan 2016 #2
LOL HerbChestnut Jan 2016 #5
If you are good enough, probably get more. Thinkingabout Jan 2016 #9
She's not that good. Fawke Em Jan 2016 #12
Yet quite a number athletes do that well or better. CajunBlazer Jan 2016 #18
"Oh, I forgot; that concept is foreign to socialists" - says an asshole Ned_Devine Jan 2016 #21
What we're really talking about is Late Stage Capitalism jhart3333 Jan 2016 #22
mayI salute you, Ned before someone alers you lol roguevalley Jan 2016 #24
good goin' Ned navarth Jan 2016 #33
This is the same poster who says it's fine for Carville to host a FUNDRAISER FOR TED CRUZ at his DisgustipatedinCA Jan 2016 #46
IF that were true Mark Grable Jan 2016 #34
A good import/export person can make millions! Babel_17 Jan 2016 #71
Nice Work When You Can Gettit... On the Other Hand... CorporatistNation Jan 2016 #7
Like the $18,000 contribution from NRA against an opponent? Thinkingabout Jan 2016 #13
That never happened? You know that's false information Lordquinton Jan 2016 #38
It is quiet true, we see on record of the votes Sanders made on gun issues, Thinkingabout Jan 2016 #52
"Services" "Not politics" ?? Really?? tokenlib Jan 2016 #8
Be serious angrychair Jan 2016 #11
Are you serious? 99th_Monkey Jan 2016 #17
Do you really believe that? Goldman Sachs also said they'd be happy with Hillary for prez. ViseGrip Jan 2016 #20
Let's let the public weigh in on that Kall Jan 2016 #29
Oh sure,...because she's a financial guru. Spitfire of ATJ Jan 2016 #40
Because Hillary is such a banking expert TheFarseer Jan 2016 #48
AKA 'Pay to Play'? sorechasm Jan 2016 #50
I think Bernie's point is that it was "pay for services". n/t winter is coming Jan 2016 #54
You're damn right it was payment for services. We call that corruption. DisgustipatedinCA Jan 2016 #65
That is the bottom line. azmom Jan 2016 #3
NBC debate, NBC poll released today, the Hillary cheering section, a total 'corporate shit show' ViseGrip Jan 2016 #6
Her History Tells The Tale Irrespective of What She Might Say Now in Order to Get CorporatistNation Jan 2016 #10
Goldman Sachs also said they'd be happy with a prez clinton. That won't work out well for us. ViseGrip Jan 2016 #14
Kicked and recommended. Uncle Joe Jan 2016 #15
Would anyone pay Bernie to give a speech? CajunBlazer Jan 2016 #16
No one on Wall Street ViseGrip Jan 2016 #19
Bernie wouldn't take it. it's called integrity roguevalley Jan 2016 #27
I read somewhere he gets $2,000 a speech, lob1 Jan 2016 #32
That's the Bernie Sanders I have watched for years now! ViseGrip Jan 2016 #61
He isn't a corrupt like that. DisgustipatedinCA Jan 2016 #47
So Bernie would be corrupt if he took money for a speech? CajunBlazer Jan 2016 #55
Not playing your game. I don't agree with Cruz supporters. DisgustipatedinCA Jan 2016 #56
Because you are losing the game treestar Jan 2016 #59
And I'm not playing your game for what should be obvious reasons. DisgustipatedinCA Jan 2016 #60
aren't those called legal bribes? tomm2thumbs Jan 2016 #23
But, Goldman Sachs expects nothing in return for their investments in her. Tierra_y_Libertad Jan 2016 #25
good for her. Lil Missy Jan 2016 #28
I doubt she'll get that after she loses. Spitfire of ATJ Jan 2016 #41
IF she loses, her and Bill will up their speaking fees! ViseGrip Jan 2016 #67
Are transcripts of the speeches available ??? SamKnause Jan 2016 #30
Some are, like her speech and ties to Monsanto - we need to get the message out, "GMO's are good!" ViseGrip Jan 2016 #62
Thank you for all the information. SamKnause Jan 2016 #66
He's also campaigning against Bill Clinton's penis jmowreader Jan 2016 #35
I guess there's only one way to settle this.... Spitfire of ATJ Jan 2016 #42
And I'm sure you can provide a link... ljm2002 Jan 2016 #53
Okay, how about this... jmowreader Jan 2016 #68
Miss the point much? ljm2002 Jan 2016 #70
Ok silenttigersong Jan 2016 #72
K&R. JDPriestly Jan 2016 #36
I attended a debate party. I knew only one of the other attendees before the party. JDPriestly Jan 2016 #37
Like it or not.... CajunBlazer Jan 2016 #69
Somebody has to do it. Unless someone dares to win without that dirty money, we will JDPriestly Jan 2016 #73
$600,000 from ONE Wall Street firm in ONE year ain't nuthin' merrily Jan 2016 #43
So what? Sanders is certainly not impugning her impartiality, he's not that kind of .....politician uponit7771 Jan 2016 #44
Bernie highlighted his skepticism that Hillary will bite the hand(s) that feed her. Green Forest Jan 2016 #45
But I am. You don't get six hundred thousand dollars from criminals for no reason. DisgustipatedinCA Jan 2016 #64
See response #62. More on Clinton speeches....just look at the Monsanto bullshit! ViseGrip Jan 2016 #63

CoffeeCat

(24,411 posts)
51. Probably a plant
Mon Jan 18, 2016, 09:17 AM
Jan 2016

placed in the audience by the Clinton camp. So when Sanders owns her with a truth zinger that one person who booed can be used to suggest that Bernie's statement was flatly rejected by the universe because, "He got booed."

LOL!

Empowerer

(3,900 posts)
58. Of course-any opposition to Sanders MUST be a plant, since no one could ever disagree with him ever!
Mon Jan 18, 2016, 10:40 AM
Jan 2016

retrowire

(10,345 posts)
26. the boo from that one lone soul
Mon Jan 18, 2016, 03:30 AM
Jan 2016

was booing the fact that Hillary took that money.

hmmm I guess it's all up to interpretation huh? lol

JimDandy

(7,318 posts)
31. That's what I thought too.
Mon Jan 18, 2016, 03:41 AM
Jan 2016

I guess it could be interpreted the other way. Only the booer knows the real intent...

stillwaiting

(3,795 posts)
49. Well, that's definitely some spin. It could have been a banker that did it.
Mon Jan 18, 2016, 08:50 AM
Jan 2016

Or, as previously stated, they could have been booing HILLARY for her actions.

I admire you for mostly being fair in most of your posts though.

 

Segami

(14,923 posts)
57. Got booed....lol!
Mon Jan 18, 2016, 10:32 AM
Jan 2016
....One moron in the crowd shouting.....probably a plant from the Clinton campaign. You are aware that Hillary has done this before?

CajunBlazer

(5,648 posts)
18. Yet quite a number athletes do that well or better.
Mon Jan 18, 2016, 01:58 AM
Jan 2016

A person's work is worth what others are willing to pay for it. Oh, I forgot; that concept is foreign to socialists.

roguevalley

(40,656 posts)
24. mayI salute you, Ned before someone alers you lol
Mon Jan 18, 2016, 03:29 AM
Jan 2016

You are my new hero. Just refer them to the purple map

 

DisgustipatedinCA

(12,530 posts)
46. This is the same poster who says it's fine for Carville to host a FUNDRAISER FOR TED CRUZ at his
Mon Jan 18, 2016, 07:03 AM
Jan 2016

house.

Make what you will of that, but this is all I'll ever need to know about this particular person.

Mark Grable

(23 posts)
34. IF that were true
Mon Jan 18, 2016, 04:05 AM
Jan 2016

If a persons work is what others are willing to pay for it, then drug dealers like El Chapo's work is worth how many million?

Many capitalists are unconcerned with law, morality, or ethics. Some capitalists are even willing to kill capitalism for a profit.

I'm talking about the "to big to fail banks".

By breaking those banks up, President Sanders will be saving capitalism from the capitalists.

Here's an important concept: borrowing money cost's money. Why then do both Democrats and Republicans borrow so much money - money they can't pay back? Could it be the revolving door between corporations and the three branches of government? Or the unlimited campaign contributions? Or the media consolidation ?

If these things were to change, it would be because a President was elected with a mandate to do them.

CorporatistNation

(2,546 posts)
7. Nice Work When You Can Gettit... On the Other Hand...
Mon Jan 18, 2016, 01:39 AM
Jan 2016

That kinda $$$$ does not come without strings attached.... Ye Ole Quid Pro Quo...

As when I was offered Campaign CA$H by a lobbyist from BIG Pharma named Ken Freeman...as a Dem running for U.S. House back in 2006...

" If you're willing ot work with/play ball with the pharmaceutical industry we'll get you all the contributions ya need..." I did not take the offer...


In contrast...

CLINTON INC. Never says NO!

Thinkingabout

(30,058 posts)
52. It is quiet true, we see on record of the votes Sanders made on gun issues,
Mon Jan 18, 2016, 09:19 AM
Jan 2016

It is a part of his record.

angrychair

(8,695 posts)
11. Be serious
Mon Jan 18, 2016, 01:41 AM
Jan 2016

She did a closed door, no press, speech (contents have never been made public) to Goldsacs and got paid hundreds of thousands of dollars and we are supposed to believe she will fight to control and limit Wall St financial institutions?

 

99th_Monkey

(19,326 posts)
17. Are you serious?
Mon Jan 18, 2016, 01:55 AM
Jan 2016

Hey, I have a bridge. It's actually a great deal.

Oh and some 'waterfront' land in Florida. You'll love it.

 

ViseGrip

(3,133 posts)
20. Do you really believe that? Goldman Sachs also said they'd be happy with Hillary for prez.
Mon Jan 18, 2016, 02:29 AM
Jan 2016

After they ran the treasury, I'm not comfortable with this anymore. She is clearly looking at keeping them in control.

sorechasm

(631 posts)
50. AKA 'Pay to Play'?
Mon Jan 18, 2016, 09:08 AM
Jan 2016

Just one example from last Thursday supporting Bernie's debate last night:

NEW YORK, January 14, 2016 — The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (NYSE: GS) today announced that it has reached an agreement in principle to resolve the ongoing investigation of the Residential Mortgage-Backed Securities Working Group of the U.S. Financial Fraud Enforcement Task Force (RMBS Working Group).


Under the terms of the agreement in principle, the firm will pay a $2.385 billion civil monetary penalty, make $875 million in cash payments and provide $1.8 billion in consumer relief. The consumer relief will be in the form of principal forgiveness for underwater homeowners and distressed borrowers; financing for construction, rehabilitation and preservation of affordable housing; and support for debt restructuring, foreclosure prevention and housing quality improvement programs, as well as land banks.


For helping to destroy our economy, they received over a $1B in interest free loans. Yet not one Banker went to jail?

Instead, Hillary is taking speaking fees from them. Is that our tax dollars being well-spent.
 

ViseGrip

(3,133 posts)
6. NBC debate, NBC poll released today, the Hillary cheering section, a total 'corporate shit show'
Mon Jan 18, 2016, 01:34 AM
Jan 2016

Bernie exposed her tonight. And she exposed herself as a preservationist of the status quo.

 

Tierra_y_Libertad

(50,414 posts)
25. But, Goldman Sachs expects nothing in return for their investments in her.
Mon Jan 18, 2016, 03:30 AM
Jan 2016

They're did it because they think she's a great entertainer.

Or,....maybe....could be...that they do expect something in return if she becomes president.

Buy a government ain't as cheap as it used to be.

 

ViseGrip

(3,133 posts)
62. Some are, like her speech and ties to Monsanto - we need to get the message out, "GMO's are good!"
Mon Jan 18, 2016, 12:19 PM
Jan 2016
https://www.organicconsumers.org/news/video-hilary-clinton-endorses-gmos-solution-focused-crop-biotechnology

Video: Hilary Clinton Endorses GMOs, Solution-Focused Crop Biotechnology

Former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has expressed her support for genetically modified crops and crop biotechnology. In a 65-minute keynote appearance at the Biotechnology Industry Organization (BIO) convention in San Diego in late June, Clinton conversed with Jim Greenwood, BIO president, on a wide range of topics including GMOs.

“I stand in favor of using seeds and products that have a proven track record,” Clinton said, adding that biotech professionals need to continue to try to make the case for GMO-skeptics. “There is a big gap between what the facts are, and what the perceptions are.”

Clinton noted that there are unwarranted fears surrounding GMOs because many people do not understand science or biotechnology and are easily swayed by code words and misguided perceptions. “Genetically modified sounds ‘Frankensteinish’ – drought resistant sounds really like something you want,” she said.

Clinton’s full talk is available in the video embedded below. Her comments on biotechnology begin at approximately 29 minutes in.

and....
http://www.naturalnews.com/049755_Bride_of_Frankenfood_Hillary_Clinton_Monsanto.html

Bride of Frankenfood: Hillary Clinton pushes GMO agenda... hires Monsanto lobbyist... takes huge dollars from Monsanto

(NaturalNews) Democrats who had been programmed to blindly vote for Hillary Clinton are picking their jaws up off the floor after learning the truth about Hillary's ties to Monsanto. The ties run so deep that she's now being dubbed the "Bride of Frankenfood." (Tweet this story)

Shockingly, Hillary Clinton's ties to Monsanto are new information to her liberal support base. It drives home the important point that nearly everyone supporting Hillary Clinton has no idea who she really is, as evidenced by this stunning new video from Mark Dice and Luke Rudkowski.

"Hillary Rodham Clinton's ties to agribusiness giant Monsanto, and her advocacy for the industry's genetically modified crops, have environmentalists in Iowa calling her 'Bride of Frankenfood'" reports the Washington Times. "A large faction of women voiced strong support for Mrs. Clinton's candidacy until the GMO issue came up, prompting them to switch allegiances to Sen. Bernard Sanders of Vermont, a liberal stalwart challenging her for the Democratic nomination."

Oh my, how little they really know about the real Hillary Clinton... keep reading to find out more...



Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/049755_Bride_of_Frankenfood_Hillary_Clinton_Monsanto.html#ixzz3xc6Gpcvc





ljm2002

(10,751 posts)
53. And I'm sure you can provide a link...
Mon Jan 18, 2016, 09:33 AM
Jan 2016

...showing where Sanders himself ever brought up Bill Clinton's sexual behavior, whether on the campaign trail or during a debate.

Waiting...

jmowreader

(50,555 posts)
68. Okay, how about this...
Mon Jan 18, 2016, 02:22 PM
Jan 2016
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10141308085

By Lisa Hagen - 01/08/16 06:29 PM EST
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) on Friday called Bill Clinton’s sexual scandals “totally disgraceful and unacceptable” but said he would not use the former president's infidelities against Hillary Clinton.

ljm2002

(10,751 posts)
70. Miss the point much?
Mon Jan 18, 2016, 03:23 PM
Jan 2016

I said:

I'm sure you can provide a link showing where Sanders himself ever brought up Bill Clinton's sexual behavior, whether on the campaign trail or during a debate.


And this is from the very next paragraph in the article you cited:

Sanders' comments came after an Iowa town hall attendee raised Bill Clinton's affair in the White House and questioned if Hillary Clinton was qualified to be president, the Washington Post reported.

Bernie Sanders has never brought up the issue himself, not once. Even Hillary Clinton was nodding in agreement when he responded to whats-her-name's question on the subject at last night's debate.

silenttigersong

(957 posts)
72. Ok
Mon Jan 18, 2016, 03:35 PM
Jan 2016

Are you for real?Trying to be funny?Cuz that prior statement is really going below the belt_lol.
The press should be asking Hillary that question.
I am waiting for the "orgie island"question .What are they going to do ask Bernie like hes just in the campaign ,to field questions for Hillary?Bernies right ask Hillary ,ask Chelsea,ask Bill Clinton,Sen.Sanders has better things to do.

JDPriestly

(57,936 posts)
37. I attended a debate party. I knew only one of the other attendees before the party.
Mon Jan 18, 2016, 04:19 AM
Jan 2016

Most of the attendees were young. Only three of us above 45 I would guess.

The big issue, the issue that got the applause was campaign financing and the big money going to Hillary. People really don't like all that big money in politics. It is one of the many reasons that Bernie is doing so well, I think.

And it is an issue on which it is too late for Hillary to win. She has been trying to change the subject, but that money issue pops right back up.

What is so hard for Americans to accept is that Congress voted to bail out Wall Street, and yet Wall Street, instead of bailing out its own debtors, the homeowners who had lost their jobs and were defaulting on mortgages or those whose houses sunk under water as housing prices dropped, just gave itself big bonuses and continued business as usual.

Congress showed mercy to Wall Street, to AIG, to the big banks, and then Wall Street, AIG and the big banks continuing to buy and control Congress, pushed ordinary people out of their homes and showed no mercy at all to the people and businesses across America.

How could the financial sector, Wall Street, whatever you want to call it be so dumb as to think that the American people would not notice that moral double-cross, that exercise in total egotism, narcissism and contempt for hardworking people across the country (and in other countries).

The stupidity and brazenness of Wall Street (and I use that term to include others in the financial sector) is very hard for me to understand. Hillary represented and in the minds of voters continues to represent that segment of our population with all its utter insensitivity to the morality of fairness that prevails in our country outside the financial sector.

CajunBlazer

(5,648 posts)
69. Like it or not....
Mon Jan 18, 2016, 03:09 PM
Jan 2016

....PAC money, the money which Bernie refuses to take, will be required to have a chance of winning the general election. A politician can get through the nominating process without it, and even brag that he is receiving "dirty" money, but that won't fly in the general election.

Why? Because the present law allows it and in the GE Bernie will be foolish to unilaterally disarm. That would be equivalent of the US voluntarily destroying all of their nuclear weapons and delivery platforms in the middle of the cold war while the Soviets kept all of theirs. We would have been at their mercy

The Republicans will have hundreds of millions of dollars set up in PAC's such as the one belong to the Koch brothers to be spent however necessary to destroy Bernie and he will have no way to defend himself. Small campaign contributions made directly to Bernie will be totally inadequate.

I too hate big money, but until Citizens United is overturned and the PAC laws are changed we can't let the Republicans beat over the head with their PAC's until we are bloody.

It is the old principal verse pragmatism thing - pragmatism, not principals, wins elections, and if we don't win we can't apply our principals in a meaningful way. Principals left not applied are useless in the real world.

JDPriestly

(57,936 posts)
73. Somebody has to do it. Unless someone dares to win without that dirty money, we will
Mon Jan 18, 2016, 04:06 PM
Jan 2016

never get rid of it. Because the argument presented in your post will always persuade anxious candidates that they have to have it just to get elected.

It's like our candidates are addicted to that dirty money. Just have to have it.

Your post expresses a logical point, but sometimes you have to just say no to your cravings.

Dirty money is dirty. We have to stop allowing it in our election process.

The Adelmans and Kochs of this world will always have more of that dirty money than we ordinary people will.

There comes a time when you just say no and you prevail over the dirt. I think Bernie's election is that time.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
43. $600,000 from ONE Wall Street firm in ONE year ain't nuthin'
Mon Jan 18, 2016, 05:32 AM
Jan 2016

And I think Mr. and Ms. Voter can get that a firm doesn't pay a politician over half a million dollars in one year while expecting nothing in return. Of course, Wall Street does owe Bill Clinton big time for Gramm, Leach, Blilely and the Commodities Futures Modernization Act of 2000. But, they probably already paid for those.

 

Green Forest

(232 posts)
45. Bernie highlighted his skepticism that Hillary will bite the hand(s) that feed her.
Mon Jan 18, 2016, 06:56 AM
Jan 2016

Her manufactured outrage at Wall Street excesses last night was Hillaryous, though.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Bernie reminds everyone a...