Does anyone really believe that $675,000 for 3 speeches is not a bribe?

[revbones]

Or for that matter the $2.5million also from Goldman Sachs to Hillary's super-PAC?

Goldman Sachs doesn't just give money away. How can anyone say that quid pro quo is not expected?

[Ferd Berfel]

1. GOldman was "Paying it Forward"

[reformist2]

15. The Clintons are now two of Wall Street's highest-paid employees.

[kristopher]

48. Total Bill and Hillary speech income $153,000,000

(CNN)Hillary Clinton and her husband, former President Bill Clinton, combined to earn more than $153 million in paid speeches from 2001 until Hillary Clinton launched her presidential campaign last spring, a CNN analysis shows.

In total, the two gave 729 speeches from February 2001 until May, receiving an average payday of $210,795 for each address. The two also reported at least $7.7 million for at least 39 speeches to big banks, including Goldman Sachs and UBS, with Hillary Clinton, the Democratic 2016 front-runner, collecting at least $1.8 million for at least eight speeches to big banks...

http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/05/politics/hillary-clinton-bill-clinton-paid-speeches/

Total Bill and Hillary Clinton speech income, Feb. 2001 thru May 2015:
TOTAL: AVERAGE: SPEECHES:
$153,669,691.00 $210,795.19 729
Total Bill Clinton speech income, Feb. 2001 thru May 2015:
TOTAL: AVERAGE: SPEECHES:
$132,021,691.00 $207,255.40 637
Total Hillary Clinton speech income, April 2013 thru March 2015:
TOTAL: AVERAGE: SPEECHES:
$21,648,000.00 $235,304.35 92

More at link above

[Warren DeMontague]

99. Know whats funny? I actually was worried and felt bad for them when they left the WH and were like

"We're broke"

I should have known they'd be fine.

[Ferd Berfel]

152. After forwarding the right wing agenda

Yea, they would take care of them

[seaotter]

2. No intelligent person can.

Only imbeciles would believe such a thing.

[revbones]

3. Hillary supporters apparently do.

I'm not sure how they reconcile this.

[seaotter]

8. No, most know better.

They just choose to discount it. I stand by my statement.

[reformist2]

16. Hillary tells them so, and they believe her every word.

[Gary 50]

83. Like this?

They believe Hillary. Hillary said she is incorruptible. Therefore, anyone challenging Hillary's ethics on this or any other subject is just repeating right wing propaganda and should be ashamed of themselves.

[840high]

89. Well - we know Hillary NEVAH lies.

[Octafish]

4. Everybody does it.

Everybody who wants to be rich, that is.

[Armstead]

31. Not if they want to be president and have any judgement

If she needed to pay some bills, she could have done a bunch of $10,000 or $20,000 speeches to some nice civic groups and schools and skipped the obscene Corporate Wall St Paydays.

[kennetha]

57. She did speeches for lots of non-wall street groups

for the same amount.

She's a rock star, face it.

I think you and the Bernie folks are just jealous. Nobody would pay Bernie anything to speak, even if he were not in the Senate.

[Armstead]

102. A rock star with poor judgement

[kristopher]

106. Have you ever wondered why Jimmy Carter isn't buddy buddy with his successors?

Time has proven his wisdom and yet he is always apart from those that came after. Why? Could it because an honest person makes those playing the corporate game uncomfortable?

Jimmy Carter: U.S. Is an 'Oligarchy With Unlimited Political Bribery'
The 39th president said the 'Citizens United' ruling 'violates the essence of what made America a great country in its political system'

BY DANIEL KREPS July 31, 2015

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/videos/jimmy-carter-u-s-is-an-oligarchy-with-unlimited-political-bribery-20150731

[Octafish]

135. Bernie Sanders gave his speech check to charity.

Which is a classy thing to do.

[kennetha]

144. Actually so did Clinton often

many of her payments weren't to her directly but to the Clinton foundation.

And the Clinton Foundation has done a heck of lot more for the world than Bernie.

[RoccoR5955]

66. Bernie doesn't do it.

And not everybody wants to be rich.

[shanti]

114. Thank you n/t

[Octafish]

136. You are correct.

Should have used a thing.

[Logical]

5. Only really really really gullible people. nt

[Maedhros]

153. That's Hillary's base. [n/t]

[Lucinda]

6. Of course it wasn't a bribe. Such nonsense. n/t

[Art_from_Ark]

49. Oh, yeah, her mere presence in the room creates an aura

that envelopes the audience and raises their consciousness to a level that even the Zig-Zag Man couldn't attain.

[closeupready]

7. See, this is what happens to people in bubbles - they wear no clothes

and everyone in their bubble tells them how smart their new threads are.

The same circles of those who operate on faulty assumptions, like 'Money is speech' or 'Corporations are people.'

As with those incredibly stupid claims, same here: $675,000 wasn't a bribe unless you can PROVE she did something in DIRECT EXCHANGE.

I mean If the legal standard is what voters are aiming for, then yeah, it's perfectly fine for her to take that money, nothing ethically wrong, not even the APPEARANCE OF IMPROPRIETY, since it's all perfectly proper.

Her supporters are those who stand to gain from the ensuing political patronage that will follow after their sought-after win.

It's just all so filthy.

[2naSalit]

75. there is an industry in giving speeches for fees.

I have been aware of it for decades, I've attended a few... much ado about nothing out of the ordinary. It's what people do when they leave a high level position. Or become lobbyists and I don't see that happening here.

[Califonz]

9. Bribe is such an ugly word...

Probably prefer to think of it as an "investment"

[SammyWinstonJack]

74. Bingo!

[hifiguy]

10. No one who has a dozen brain cells to rub together believes

it is not a bribe.

Poor Richard Nixon. In his day you had to collect valises full of cash in empty parking ramps. Now the obvious bribery is so out in the open the banksters just back the armored cars up to the Clintons' doors and shovel out the money in broad daylight.

#BankLivesMatter

[JaneyVee]

11. Actually, Goldman very much does just give money away.

That is literally what they do. They take piles of their money and invest it into things with no guarantee of getting any of it back. And 675k is chump change to them.

[revbones]

13. There is a difference in investing and giving it away.

And I think they have a good guarantee with Hillary...

[BillZBubb]

14. Stop the spinning, you're making me dizzy!

[lob1]

68. And that's how they tanked the economy.

[JonLeibowitz]

86. HAHAHAHAHA

"no guarantee of getting any of it back" =/= "give money away"

The only reason investments have positive expected return is because of risk. But you knew that and were just trying to be clever. Too clever by half.

[99th_Monkey]

87. THIS ^ is rich. So you actually DO believe GS is just "throwing money around willy nilly"

with NO expectations of ANY return.

That does not sound like a very viable Goldman Sachs business plan to
me, but hey, if it helps your candidate to say that .. why not?

[snagglepuss]

100. GS investors should sue. What an ad! Invest with GS! We at GS throw YOUR money away!

[99th_Monkey]

104. Where are the Yes Men when you need them?

They could do a great commercial for GS.

[BillZBubb]

12. Not a bribe, just an expression of esteem. High e$teem.

wink, wink.

[procon]

17. What government office would have been subject to leverage or

amenable to exploitation at the time these bribes were buying this influence?

[revbones]

25. Well, without going into too much of a list...

There are the free trade deals that she promised unions to fight, but now her emails have proven she lobbied for them.

Her views on the weak-sauce Dodd-Frank.

It was known she was going to run for president again, so it was an investment.


Are you saying that she just took their money as a sort of double-agent and planned to secretly betray them all along? Ooooooh, some more 13 dimensional chess that is...

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

18. Not a "bribe". Think "investment of capital in a promising product".

[renate]

19. I mean no disrespect to Hillary when I say that I can imagine how she wouldn't see it that way

For a long time she's been around people to whom that kind of money doesn't mean what it does to you and me--not even close. In her orbit (and again, I honestly don't mean any disrespect by terms like "in her orbit"--it's just a fact that she moves in rarefied circles), people are routinely compensated at a rate that is wildly out of proportion to what they actually do.

She's a big deal. She's a former first lady, a former senator, and a former secretary of state. I can easily see how she wouldn't see that kind of money as excessive.

Now, what Goldman Sachs' expectations might have been... that's a completely different question.

[revbones]

26. Awful lot of assumptions there.

I think you're assuming she's an honest actor here. I don't think that's feasible after her lying about Bernie regarding dismantling Obamacare or telling unions she'd fight against the trade deals and us finding out via the emails that she lobbied for them.

[SidDithers]

20. Welcome to DU...nt

Sid

[rock]

21. Maybe you better call the cops

You could testify in court. You'd be the star witness!

[revbones]

22. Deflect all you want. You still can't argue your candidate is not on the take.

[rock]

55. If this information is true

It's your civic duty to report it to the police! In fact you'll be committing a crime if you don't! Go ahead, what're you waiting for?

[RoccoR5955]

67. And you know about it, so you could be considered an accessory! n/t

[rock]

138. No, I believe it's false!

I would be silly believing such a thing!

[NurseJackie]

23. Yes.

[revbones]

24. I've got a bridge for sale. Interested?

Did the resistance to facts come all at once, or was it gradual?

[NurseJackie]

35. Ha! :-D

[Logical]

59. Only really gullible people I assume. nt

[99th_Monkey]

88. The word "BRIBE" apparently has no meaning to you, or your candidate.

Inquiring minds want to know: "Will Hillary "pull strings" to have the word
"BRIBE" expunged from the English dictionary when she's in the oval office?

[OhZone]

27. Wall Street gave the Obama campaign tons of money.

Didn't effect his push for reform.

Oh well.

[revbones]

29. Hmmm, tell me how many CEO's are in jail right now

And the bs Hillary excuse of "Well, that guy I think you like did it too!" doesn't mean it's not wrong. It doesn't make it not a bribe. It doesn't lessen any expectations of quid pro quo either.

It also resulted in appointments like Timothy Geitner and other Goldman Sachs people (https://prof77.wordpress.com/politics/an-updated-list-of-goldman-sachs-ties-to-the-obama-government-including-elena-kagan/)

[EndElectoral]

45. Uh..maybe you ought to look at this.

http://fanniemaeshareholder.blogspot.com/2015/06/the-truth-about-timothy-geithnergoldman.html


The top aid of Tim Geithner’s- the current Treasury Secretary under Obama Administration, is Mark Patterson- a Goldman Sachs lobbyist. He oversees the government’s $700 billion financial bailout program. Patterson’s appointment is a clear violation of Obama’s promise to bar lobbyists from his government.

Right from the start, Geithner's top aid is from Goldman Sachs, Mark Patterson. As you'll see in a bit, Geithner was promoted to NY Fed by Goldman Sachs alumni Robert Rubin, an ex-Goldman co-chairman and a Treasury secretary in the Clinton administration, he promoted Timothy F. Geithner at Treasury. Mr. Geithner now leads the New York Fed until 2009, after Henry Paulsons departure. Obama Nominates Geithner to replace Paulson and the Senate confirms him into office.

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=6735898
Another Lobbyist Headed Into Obama Administration
January 27, 2009
By JUSTIN ROOD and EMMA SCHWARTZ

Despite President Barack Obama's pledge to limit the influence of lobbyists in his administration, a recent lobbyist for investment banking giant Goldman Sachs is in line to serve as chief of staff to Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner.

Mark Patterson was a registered lobbyist for Goldman until April 11, 2008, according to public filings.
Patterson first began lobbying for Goldman Sachs in 2005, after working as policy director for then-Senate majority leader Tom Daschle. According to publicly filed lobbying disclosure records, he worked on issues related to the banking committee, climate change and carbon trading and immigration reform, among others.

Patterson's lobbying was first noted by the National Journal magazine.

Patterson is one of over a dozen recent lobbyists in line for important posts in the Obama administration, despite a presidential order severely restricting the role of lobbyists in his administration, the magazine reported.

The Obama administration's limitation on lobbyists isn't a direct ban. Lobbyists are still allowed to be a part of the administration working on areas that they have not lobbied on. But the potential appointment of Patterson and others raise questions about just how much the Obama administration will be able to move away from the revolving door model of business that has become so common inside the Beltway.

"Considering that Goldman was an early and large recipient of our TARP funding, being pulled out of that really does effect his ability to be an effective chief of staff for the treasury secretary," said Steve Ellis, president of the watchdog group Taxpayers for Common Sense.


...

[Blue State Bandit]

69. He got "Speakers Fees?" Really?

I'll be over here with the popcorn waiting to see how this gets conflated.

Huge campaign contributions are bad enough. But that is/was the system in place. Those speaker fees went right into her personal bank account.

[Avalon Sparks]

133. Perhaps

But can you name even one person that was arrested or even charged for their illegal activities?

[Agnosticsherbet]

28. 10 Highest-Paid Public Speakers In the World

10 Highest-Paid Public Speakers In the World
. Donald Trump, $1-1.5 million:

In 2006 and 2007, The Learning Annex shelled out a hefty fee to have Donald Trump at their Real Estate Wealth Expos, paying him a whopping $1.5 million per speech for a 17-seminar conference. Trump only had to speak for an hour at each one, but audience members say he gave them their money’s worth by staying to answer audience questions. This was after Trump had already raked in one million per speech speaking at the same seminars in 2005. The company felt Trump was well worth the money, however, as few others have the celebrity and business savvy he does.

2. Ronald Reagan, $1 million:

Back in 1989, the Fujisankei Communications Group in Japan paid this former president a cool million per speech to come to the country and tour. Reagan gave two speeches while there as well as speaking at media outlets and giving interviews. Still, Reagan didn’t make out too shabby with $2 million (in 1989 dollars) under his belt for sharing his business and presidential experience with the company desperately in need of public relations help. The Reagans created a national sensation in Japan, boosting the company’s profile.

3. Tony Blair, $616,000:

On a lecture by lecture basis, Blair is likely the world’s best paid speaker. In 2009, he made almost $616,000 for two half-hour speeches given in the Philippines, raking in over $10,000 a minute. Listeners didn’t get to hear what he had to say for free, however, and many tickets to the event topped $500. Even in a time of economic crisis when many have slashed their fees, Blair’s have remained buoyant, due perhaps to his lengthy stint as Prime Minister and the insight and analysis he can offer as a result of it.

4. Bill Clinton, $150,000- $450,000:

It isn’t unusual for this former president to net $150,000 and up for a speech. Clinton has spoken at a wide range of events around the world from environmental conferences to business meetings, often promoting causes like HIV/AIDS treatment, economic empowerment and leadership development. The same charisma and likeability that won him two elections likely contribute to organizations’ willingness to shell out the big bucks to have him speak. Clinton has scaled back his speaking schedule, however, to support his wife as Secretary of State.

At 1 to 1.5 million per speech, who was bribing Trump?

[revbones]

33. So if someone else does it, then it's ok?

Are you really using Donald Trump as an example to try to prove that Hillary is not corrupt?

And really? Using Reagan as an example??? "Oh, it's ok the guy from the other team did it, it must be ok. Never mind that we call him corrupt."

Not sure there's much difference in using Bill as an example. He's not really enough of a paragon of virtue to prove Hillary isn't corrupt.

[Agnosticsherbet]

37. If you research, you will find that paid speakers are common. It is not a bribe.

Your bribe comment is lacks any link to reality.

[revbones]

40. Then she should release her speeches if it's just a common thing right?

You know in your heart of hearts that there are expectations with that money. If she gets into the White House, how many Goldman Sachs execs will get appointments? Bookmark this and come back if she gets in. I dare you.

[kristopher]

134. "Legal Bribe" is the accepted term for what is going on.

Seriously, this isn't in dispute. The fact is the political class is taking money from special interests and in return the special interest parties are granted access to the mechanism of policy making. They are, quite literally, being allowed to write the laws that govern their business affairs.

If that doesn't disturb us as a member of the democratic body politic, then something is very, very skewed in our values.

[Armstead]

43. And I remember the raft of shit Reagan got for those speeches from Democrats

But times change I guess. Situational ethics and beliefs.

[onecaliberal]

30. If it wasn't a bribe then Goldman would just go ahead and pay their goddamn taxes

This same bullshit gets called out when republicans do it. There is no way this is anything other bribery. Period. Hillary supporters know it too. Beyond pathetic his is why they support.

[Metric System]

32. Have you seen how much celebs are paid for speeches and appearances?

[revbones]

34. Do tell.

And if it was just for her celebrity status (which is laughable), then why won't she release the text of the speeches?

Hillary supporters = Trump supporters. Willfully ignorant of facts.

[Metric System]

36. Thanks for insulting us.

[revbones]

38. Just pointing out the resistence to facts. nt

[Metric System]

39. If that's what you call it.

[revbones]

41. If she wins, let's come back here and count how many Goldman Sachs execs get appointments. nt

[revbones]

42. It is. Otherwise it would be insulting to your intelligence

I can only assume that you have built up a tolerance because of the right-wing smears and now are resistant to even considering that Hillary might have a flaw.

[Politicalboi]

44. Are they running for president?

Any excuse. It's her turn is all you guys have.

[revbones]

47. Nice. n/t

[RufusTFirefly]

101. Wow! You're comparing democratically elected public servants to celebrities??!

Perhaps you should cast your vote for the blowhard reality TV star.

It seems like a good fit.

[UglyGreed]

46. No

[Jefferson23]

50. Her supporters evidently can rationalize many things about her. This one is a biggie.

Some of their responses in this thread are illuminating..to say the least.

[revbones]

51. Hillary supporters truly have no way to dispute the corruption nt

[closeupready]

108. The fact that her supporters here excuse her lack of ethics/stupidity

is one reason among many that I can NEVER support her.

[kennetha]

52. Do you know how much in total she got for her speeches?

that's a drop in the bucket. Plus she gave lots of speeches to lots of different groups and organization at the same rate.

Was every paid speech a bribe?

[revbones]

54. Some numbers have been reported in places like TYT

And really there are only 2 reasons for being paid that for speeches.

1. There is an expectation of quid pro quo. In her case, it was known she was going to run for president.
2. It is a reward for something done while in office - this too is also likely.

[kennetha]

56. How silly

Universities paid her that amount too.

Was that a quid pro quo?

[revbones]

58. Yes.

You guys are unbelievable.

You think with all the talk about "free tuition", "debt-free" college and all the court cases with for-profit universities, that they are not expecting some help from her???

[kennetha]

62. Hey Tell Bernie

To tell Hillary to release those transcripts of those University speeches.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/at-time-of-austerity-eight-universities-spent-top-dollar-on-hillary-clinton-speeches/2014/07/02/cf1d1070-016a-11e4-b8ff-89afd3fad6bd_story.html?tid=a_inl


Is she in the pocket of Wall Street?

Or those evil intellectuals at the nations great Universities?

Or both?

She's a plutocratic intellectual elitist who cares about nothing but profit and free thought.

[think]

96. 50% of her paid speeches were given to corporations who lobby congress

http://time.com/3889577/hillary-clinton-paid-speeches-lobbyists-influence/

[Lizzie Poppet]

143. c. $21 million over the two years prior to her candidacy announcement.

The overwhelming majority of it from large corporations. Bought and paid for...

Total Hillary Clinton Speech Income, April 2013 thru March 2015:
Total: $21,648,000
Average: $235,304
Speeches: 92

- from a CNN article published on 5 Feb.

[NowSam]

53. This candidate brought to you by. ..sponsor.

Bought and paid for.

[redstateblues]

60. Still no proof of quid pro quo

Lots of smears- no proof. Envy is an ugly emotion

[revbones]

63. There will never be enough proof for Hillary supporters

You guys are basically the same as Trump supporters.

You can read her emails proving she lobbied for the Colombia Free Trade Agreement after she publicly promised unions to fight it.

You can see her claim to be better than the Republicans and that she'll fight Wall St, but she won't release transcripts of what she really told Wall St.

You can watch her blatantly lie saying that Bernie wants to repeal Obamacare and start over.

You can see Clinton Foundation pay for play activities in her emails.

Nothing will ever sway you. Just like Trump supporters will excuse everything he does.

[think]

82. You confuse envy with disgust...

[Warren DeMontague]

98. Just step outside of the primary bickering and admit that its a lot of scratch for a speech.

Of course there's no "proof of quid pro quo". You're not dealing with amateurs.

[coyote]

139. No proof.

What do you expect to see, a contract that says, "We, Goldman Sach, pay you $250,000 as a bribe to save our collective ass from prosecution for fucking the world economy"

Sheesh.

[SunSeeker]

61. It was not a bribe. She was not in public office when doing the speaking circuit. nt

[RoccoR5955]

64. Of course it was a bribe.

A legal bribe, but a bribe none the less.

[Blue State Bandit]

65. More like a retainer...

quid-pro-in case I need a-quo

[revbones]

70. The responses from Hillary supporters are crazy

Hillary can do no wrong. *fingers in ears* "la la la la la ...."

Wow. Just wow.

[Milliesmom]

71. I have a couple of questions.

Do you like your life now? do you care how our poor are suffering/,do you care how the working poor are on food stamps because they don't have a decent minimum wage? do you care that women's rights are being taken away ? do you care that young people are coming out of college with millions in debt ? and then can't find a decent job.
If you truly care, then you will vote for Mr. Sanders as most of what I just mentioned will stay the same under Mrs. Clinton, you will have Bill back in the WH and trust me he will have a lot to say ( behind the scenes) with what she does as President.
I am 74 and have watched the Clintons and seen the scandals every since they began their careers. I never voted for Clinton because of what I had read about him in Arkansas, so enter at your own risk, but you are also putting this onto others that do not choose to live under the 1% 's rule.

[revbones]

72. *Claps*

Hear hear!

[840high]

95. .+10

[Duval]

73. The Willfully Ignorant. K&R

[CentralMass]

76. No.

[Goblor]

77. That would

pay my current student debt 22 times over ...

[Carlo Marx]

78. If we made politicians wear NASCAR style patches for campaign cash...

unfortunately, due to her gluttonous relationship with wall street,there'd be no room for Hillary to fit her other employers on her suits, pharmaceutical, fracking companies,hedge funds, etc. Maybe they would file a lawsuit for discrimination.

[revbones]

79. I'm kinda waiting for someone to talk about the Clinton Foundation

but then its common knowledge that donations there resulted in arms deals and other lucrative negotiations...

[Docreed2003]

107. I'm really surprised that no one is pointing this out more frequently. Nt

[840high]

80. Of course it is.

[silvershadow]

81. I'm thinking it was payment for services already rendered.

They have to wash it for the books, so after they get what they want, they invite whomever for a "speech" where the payment is made. ? That's what I've been thinking forever.

[SciDude]

84. The bankers insisted she take the money so she had no choice!

A lie so bad it's embarrassing to all Americans that this candidate is being taken seriously in a presidential election.

Trump vs Clinton is starting to sound like a frightening possible reality... the problem is there isn't much lesser of these two evils.

[MaggieD]

85. If Reich gets $100k per speech then....

$225k per speech for her sounds fair.

[dschmott]

90. The money has not/will not influence anything

And to quote Bill "I did not have sex with that woman"

[dschmott]

93. And Goldman Sachs is not a criminal organization

[ReallyIAmAnOptimist]

91. Nope.

[humbled_opinion]

92. Her supporters tell me

not many Democratic voters care about this issue..... I say when Trump releases those transcripts and it shows here yucking it up with the fat cats during the GE ... the Democratic party will cease to exist...

[99th_Monkey]

94. Some of her supporters upstring insist that GS loves giving away free money

to whoever, whenever, never expecting ANY thing in return.

Great to have them 'on record' saying such nonsense. .. but kind
sad too.

[humbled_opinion]

157. Such blind faith is well it's

IGNORANT....

[Warren DeMontague]

97. Um, no.

But for that much money I would call it whatever they wanted me to.

[RufusTFirefly]

103. Cognitive dissonance is fascinating in theory ...

... but frightening to witness in practice.

[revbones]

105. +1000

[rbrnmw]

109. this has only been posted thousands of times

[revbones]

110. Good response! Way to debunk it!

It's been posted before so it must not be true.

[ozone_man]

111. Nope, she's got the Goldman handcuffs.

It is bribery, graft, corruption, and greed.

[Recursion]

112. Yes. Do you think Clinton changed a single position because of it?

I thought the complaint was that she on her own supported "banksters" or whatever too much?

You actually think they gave her money in order for her to change a specific policy? That's kind of naive.

[revbones]

113. Yes.

Much like many countries got their arms deals pushed through after donations to the Clinton Foundation.

I also think that if she wins, she will in return give appointments to Goldman Sachs execs, much like Obama did.

And again yes, I think she was influenced by the money and will continue to be influenced by it. It's extraordinarily "naïve" to believe that she was just given the money because she's such a good speaker - but then you truly believe that, then why do you think she won't release the transcripts?

[Recursion]

115. Name me one Obama cabinet appointment from Goldman Sachs

One single example.

[revbones]

117. Just one?

1. Larry Summers: Obama chief economic adviser and head of the National Economic Counsel. Worked under Robert Rubin at Goldman Sachs.
2. Lael Brainard: Under Secretary of the Treasury
3. John Thain: Obama Administration: Advisor to Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner. Former Goldman Sachs Title: President and Chief Operating Officer
4. Thomas Donilon: Deputy National Security Adviser
5. William C. Dudley: President and Chief Executive Officer of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York
6. Douglas Elmendorf: Obama Director of the Congressional Budget Office
7. Rahm Emanuel: Obama Chief of Staff, on the payroll of Goldman Sachs receiving $3,000 per month
8. Dianna Farrell: Obama Administration: Deputy Director, National Economic Council Former Goldman Sachs Title: Financial Analyst.
9. Stephen Friedman: Obama Administration: Chairman, President’s Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board
10. Michael Frohman: Robert Rubin’s Chief of Staff while Rubin served as Secretary of the Treasury
11. Anne Fudge: Appointed to Obama budget deficit reduction committee
12. Peter Orszag: Obama Budget Director. Founding director of the Hamilton Project, funded by Goldman Sachs
13. Philip Murphy: Obama Administration: Ambassador to Germany. Former Goldman Sachs Title: Head of Goldman Sachs

There is confusion as to whether Timothy Geithner: Secretary of the Treasury was actually a managing partner at Goldman Sachs or just other banks.

I'm kind of tired of this now, but if you want I bet I could get to at least 50.

[Recursion]

118. So, no cabinet picks, I notice?

Which was what I asked for.

Geithner never worked for Goldman Sachs. That was a joke a columnist made. For that matter his only time in the private sector ever was at a CFR think tank.

[revbones]

119. Under-secretaries don't count? Guess you got me. Wow.

1. Didn't I say there was confusion on Geithner and whether he worked for other banks?
2. I'm assuming under-secretaries count.
3. I'm betting that you don't realize that just because I don't have a top-level cabinet position off the top of my head or feel like Googling for some rando Hillary fan, that you still lost what I'm assuming was your overall point about wall street execs and the Obama administration - or are you really saying that it's ok, just not in the actual top-level cabinet and under-secretaries are fine?

[Recursion]

120. There's no confusion whatsoever about Geithner

He never worked for a private bank; his only time in banking was at the Fed. He's spent almost all of his career in government.

I'm assuming under-secretaries count.

They aren't cabinet positions, which is what I asked for.

for some rando Hillary fan

Nice try! I'm voting for Sanders.

[revbones]

121. Ok, while I didn't specifically say Geithner was a Goldman Sachs employee

AND even mentioned the confusion and that it might have been other banks indicating I wasn't 100% certain, you will just parse out the words and only accept top-level cabinet officials rather than sub-cabinet officials?

Wow. So I guess you win huh? Nice victory "top level" vs. "sub". Must be a tasty win to also enable you to ignore the other names I mentioned. *snicker*

[revbones]

122. Just went back to check. I did mention a cabinet level officials as well

Rahm Emanuel White House Chief of Staff
Larry Summers Council of Economic Advisers

I'm sure googling could find more but both of those are cabinet-level positions.

[Recursion]

123. OMG Emmanuel? Seriously?

Fine, if Rahm Emmanuel is "from Goldman Sachs" then so is basically everyone in Washington. He did PR for them for like a week.

CEA is not a cabinet position.

[revbones]

125. Go to wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cabinet_of_the_United_States scroll down to cabinet level.

But this is really ridiculous and I'm not sure of your intended point at this stage. You want to claim a victory because I didn't name a top-level cabinet official that had specific ties to Goldman Sachs? Technically I did, and I feel proved the larger point by listing multiple high-level people specifically from Goldman Sachs, but you can have the victory if you are hung up on parsing things to that level, it's not worth any more of my time really since you are obviously only interested in claiming a pretty shallow victory. Hope that brightened your day.

That said, if you were really engaging in some sort of discussion and I just misread your posts then I'm sorry. My interpretation though is that you just wanted to prove me wrong and so I hope that petty victory works for you.

[Recursion]

126. My point is people have been saying for 7 years "Obama's cabinet is lousy with Goldman Sachsers"

And it's not true. I'll grant you Emmanuel (though I'll roll my eyes).

Summers was not the Chairman of the Council of Economic advisors, which is the cabinet-level CEA position.

[revbones]

128. Your point is still pretty thin and predicated on top-level vs sub

[Recursion]

129. I never claimed it was thick; it's just a pet peeve I've had for seven years now (nt)

[revbones]

131. So why try to challenge someone with it rather than just put it out there?

Did it improve your life any to try to set me up with the "cabinet level" question and prove me wrong? I don't think so AND I didn't even mention the word "cabinet", I specifically said "appointments".

But I do think that had you commented to me something like the following, that this exchange would have been on a different level.

Me: "I also think that if she wins, she will in return give appointments to Goldman Sachs execs, much like Obama did."
You: Which appointments are you talking about? I don't know of any cabinet-level ones? Geithner wasn't a Goldman Sachs employee despite what many think because of...
Me: Ah, there are several (provides list), but I didn't know for certain about Geithner.
You: Yeah, it's been a pet peeve of mine.

[MrMickeysMom]

116. I'd say it's common knowledge...

... that is, for anyone WITH knowledge.

[sabrina 1]

124. All Money from Corps to political candidates is BRIBERY. Don't know why anyone is

trying to deny it.

[ladjf]

127. You wouldn't find many people who would think otherwise.

This suggest to me that the Hillary voters know what she has been doing and don't disapprove of it. Not good.

[Todays_Illusion]

130. Dear Hillary, we will pay you if you refuse to give the workers a raise. YT Goldman Sachs.nt

[PoliticAverse]

132. "Payment for services rendered". n/t

[auntpurl]

137. Me.

I personally know a lot of people who get paid a lot of money for speeches/presentations at conferences and the like. They go in, they do their speech, they leave. It doesn't affect who they are or what they believe in.

Hillary is one of the most famous, admired women in the world. She's made speeches for all sorts of people.

I'm sure people will disagree with me, but you DID ask.

Peace.

[revbones]

140. Sure. Be sure to book mark this

And if she's elected, look at who she appoints from Goldman Sachs. Watch the economic positions. Then you'll get a nice education on how this works.

[chknltl]

141. Nope. nuff said

[Lizzie Poppet]

142. Of course it's a bribe. It's just that Hillary acolytes are okay with it.

Pay no attention to that trivial stiff, citizen...there's nothing to see here.

[beedle]

145. Even giving the Clintons the benefit of the doubt

and assuming that they, unlike every other human being, is incorruptible, most politicians are not so 'perfect'. Politicians who take big money, in any form, for any reason, at any time before, during or after their political life, from any industry that they were involved in making decisions, do not deserve to be, and should not be trusted.

I can almost understand that these Clinton fans might actually believe (mistakenly IMO) that Hillary is not influenced by money she receives from the financial sector, but there can be no excuse for supporting this kind of abuse of ethics in general. And if it is in general a bad idea, then they should be DEMANDING that Hillary make dismantling this corrupt system a priority ... they can stand by her during this election claiming that she has to 'play the game' in order to get into power and have the ability to make these changes, but there is no excuses for supporting (or even ignoring) the corrupt system and making excuses for 'pay for play politics'.

The financial industry can send lobbyists to Washington to state their case, but what they should not be allowed to do is pay politicians (past, current, or future) for any reason. Any argument that government needs experienced financial executives in government is making an argument that experience and history tells us is bullshite. If they have important information for government, then provide that information through a lobby process, not some pay for play, back room, back-patting elitist group hug session.

[revbones]

146. Hear-hear! n/t

[LanternWaste]

147. What is the precise and relevant amount that would contraindicate a bribe

What then is the precise and relevant amount paid that would contraindicate a bribe, and on what objective measure is that number based on?





I suspect you'll provide many editorials, feelings, implications and counter-questions. In fact, I suspect you'll provide all but those two specific answers.

[Gwhittey]

148. Proof Hilary can be bribed

Sen. Warren wrote a New York Times op-ed in April 1998 about this bankruptcy reform bill that was going through congress and how it would make it so Average Joe would have a harder time doing bankruptcy, a bill by credit card companies via GOP. Hillary Clinton read the article and called Warren to White House to get more details. Upon hearing the facts of bill she influenced her husband to veto it, which he did.

Then in 2001 a Senator Clinton endorsed and voted for this same bill. After getting "donations" to her NY Senate bid from Citi-group

[revbones]

149. Boom! Truth-bomb

Carefully ignored by all Hillary supporters though.

[jrandom421]

150. If that's a bribe

Goldman Sachs got off WAY cheap.$4 million won't even cover a decent executive retreat in Aspen.

[revbones]

151. Well, it's not counting the $2.5mil to her super-PAC

Or that so many of her staff are from there.

[jrandom421]

154. Like I said

That's still WAY cheap for a President. A couple of million? That's not even pocket change! You couldn't even bribe a state governor for that amount!

If you're going to bribe the leader of the free world, it's gonna have to be WAY more than bribing Nigerian officials for a liquefied natural gas plant.

http://allafrica.com/stories/200809050001.html

[revbones]

155. Um... yes you can, and for much less.

[jrandom421]

156. Heck , If I'm going to get bribed to do things

for Goldman Sachs as President, I sure the heck am going to demand that I get paid more than some Nigerian officials who are siting a Liquefied Natural Gas plant that got over $180 million from Haliburton!

Whatever number they talk about for a bribe, better start with a "B"!

[BreakfastClub]

158. Here's my questions: 1.Why do you think Hillary wants to be bribed, and 2.

Don't you understand she can make a hell of a lot of money without being bribed? Of course she can! This bribery thing is nonsense. It's illogical. Think about it clearly. You are recklessly accusing this woman of taking bribes under the guise of pay for a speech. Why does she need to do that when she can get speaking fees all over the country and the world without being bribed? Why would she choose to get bribed when she can easily make the same amount of money and not get bribed? Ahh. logic. It can be a slippery thing sometimes, can't it?

[revbones]

159. I'm not sure there was really any "logic" in that comment.

What you fail to grasp is that those speaking fees are bribes both before and after.

Why do politicians get such lucrative jobs after they leave office? Because of the actions they performed while in office. Why do they get speaking deals? Both as a reward and incentive if they are re-entering office via the revolving door as Hillary did.

If you truly believe that there is nothing expected for that money, and that she won't have a ton of Goldman Sachs appointees similarly to how she already does on her campaign, then that is just too naïve for me to continue this discussion.

[revbones]

160. For those asking, yes it does and did change her votes

Just look at the bankruptcy bill. She was against it. Then took bank money. Then voted for it.

[Cheese Sandwich]

161. Straight up bribe