"Get Your Ass Out of the Race": Occupiers DEMAND Hillary Clinton RELEASE Wall Street Speeches

[Segami]

A group of protesters gathered outside the Trump Building near Wall Street, Wednesday, to demand Democratic front runner Hillary Clinton release the transcripts of speeches she made to large financial institutions or consider else exiting the presidential race.

"You, Hillary Clinton, are not even a Democrat," screamed one protester, who said she supported Sen. Bernie Sanders. "You are a corporatist."

[rock]

1. Wonder what they base that demand on?

[Herman4747]

6. That the Democratic nominee should have nothing to hide. n/t

Do you disagree?

[rock]

12. Well yes, that's preposterous!

I don't think many people would want ALL their actions, thoughts, and conditions publicized. Many people get really excited when you invade their privacy, especially without justification.

[Segami]

14. "Privacy"?.....People are demanding that she release her speech transcripts

...people are not demanding that she release the contents of her Estate Will or Bill Clinton love letters.

[rock]

17. Don't understand English well?

I can recommend a dictionary. Private is the opposite of public which these speeches obviously are not.

[Segami]

20. Your sense of comprehension is lame.

But, please continue on your astral journey.

[PyaarRevolution]

23. These speeches.

Were given to the organization that had a substantial part in causing the Great Recession, they bet on Greece to go crash in the EU after loaning them the money to place in their finances to appear solvent to the EU. Lastly, they are believed to have been a BIG factor in the fact we had the Great Depression occur.

[roguevalley]

47. rock, no one has privacy about their actions when they run for office especially when they got

3/4 of a million dollars for 3 hours work in front of the worst collection of people since the last staff meeting held by Hitler. She owes us a full and complete explanation of her thoughts, beliefs, promises and attitudes or she doesn't deserve a vote. Since she was setting up to run a few months after she did this, the outpouring of outrage is hers to bear. Given that she figured she had it already in the bag, she didn't care what this looked like and its come to bite her in the ass.

[rock]

66. Well finally

A sane response to my simple questions. I do thank you. If I may, then it appears they base their demand on political coercion, in which case she might have to cede, especially since I'm sure that we're not going to find any statements that lay out any of her nefarious plans. Thanks again!

[uhnope]

84. overpaid

[MrMickeysMom]

159. I can recommend several sources, state, local and national on ethics, if you need it...

Time to re-orient your compass on the transcripts. All bets are off when you pretend that part of your constituency's interest in you are PRIVATE.

[gordyfl]

44. If You Want to Hear Her Wall Street Speeches

you'll have to fork over $250,000.00 to Hillary, and sign a pledge to keep it "private".

[Herman4747]

15. The concern here isn't about privacy being violated for a speech...

...given to a group of people (she wasn't concerned about her privacy then). No, the concern is:

"Hillary, we shall give you all this money, and in return, should you win the presidency, then you shall..."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quid_pro_quo

[rock]

19. She was selling the access to her speech

To these people. This is not that hard a concept to catch on to.

[Herman4747]

22. They paid her $675,000 FOR 3 HOURS OF HER TIME...

...what did they get in return?
The speech transcripts may shed some light in this.

[FreakinDJ]

26. "It must have been a pretty good speech"

[Herman4747]

28. And possibly a pretty good bribe as well!

[Unknown Beatle]

161. So you're willing to hire a person for president

by not seeing her complete résumé? You seem to forget, this is a hiring process, that's why you have few people trying to win our votes. She's saying she won't release her full résumé unless all of the candidates release theirs. The problem is, we're democrats, and as such, we don't care about the republicans résumés, we only care about our two remaining prospective candidates. Bernie has already released his full résumé, now we're just waiting for Hillary's full résumé as well.

Hillary's speeches to Goldman Sachs is part of her résumé, no matter how you look at it.

[greiner3]

164. Hell to get a job in increasingly diverse companies

It is required to give these companies access to you social media accounts public or PRIVATE

[fun n serious]

58. Preach! nt

[jwirr]

73. One of the issues of this campaign is corporate money and

how it would effect the decisions made in the WH. She got paid to make speeches to bankers and corporations. She gets much of her campaign contributions from those corporations.

We have a right to know what she has said to them. It is part of the issue.

If she does not release them then she has to understand that we are going to assume she is hiding something and vote against her.

[JackRiddler]

106. Privacy? Privacy? Really?

Her deals with her Wall Street controllers are a private matter, of no consquence to the politics of allowing this person to be chief executive? Really?

Do you even read what you write?

[gcomeau]

75. This thing called transparency.

It may be an alien concept to a Clinton supporter.

[PatrickforO]

152. Their desire (and mine) to see what she told the Wall Street lizards versus

what she is saying now. Because, rock, no one really believes her.

[grossproffit]

2. The Blaze?

is going on here?

[Jack Rabbit]

49. Broken clock and all that, y'know

Now that we know about how you feel about the source of the video, how do you feel about talking to Goldman Sachs execs for a few minutes and receiving an exorbitant speaking fee and what do you think she said to them?

[uhnope]

70. OMFG. Glenn Beck is now a DU elder.

lost it

[NurseJackie]

87. Amazing, isn't it? I've had enough! It's as if nobody cares any more...

... how can there be "over the line" if there is no line?

[Unknown Beatle]

162. This actually happened in NYC.

A video was taped and released showing what happened, no doctoring of the video, just some edits for time, and it shows people for Bernie calling out to Hillary to release her transcripts. All facts and released by The Blaze. Now, as much as I hate Beck and The Blaze, the video shows people calling out Hillary. No amount of spin will make it not so. No amount of indignation will not make it not happen.

It's a fact and it happened and it's on video released by The Blaze. If it was the same thing released by CNN, or MSNBC, or Crooks and Liars, etc., it would be the same because it happened in NYC and it would show people for Bernie calling out Hillary to release her Goldman Sachs transcripts.

But, because it's something negative about Hillary, a line has been crossed? I guess you don't like facts.

Look, people on the right and a lot of people on the left, don't like Hillary because she distorts the truth and she lies about her record. I'll give you one example, she says she had nothing to do with the coup d'Etat in Honduras, when the truth is, she was very instrumental with regime change there.

So please, don't act like it's a horror because The Blaze published facts about a demonstration against Hillary.

[monicaangela]

3. Awesome Segami

[WilmywoodNCparalegal]

4. I was at one of those speeches

not the ones for Goldman Sachs or similar, but she did speak to the Society for Human Resources Management (SHRM) in 2013, for which she was paid a hefty fee (I believe over $280K). Fareed Zakaria and Gabby Giffords also spoke at that conference. I am sure they were also compensated (though not at Ms. Clinton's rates, I am sure).

It was a typical speech - like one I've heard a billion times before. Very generic stuff, how HR contributes to the American workforce, etc. etc.

I cannot vouch for the material contained in other speeches, but this one was a pretty standard speech. One of the reasons why big associations and corporations pay a lot of money is to get a highly visible speaker.

I do speak on my area of expertise but all I get is the hotel night prior to the speech and my flight. Obviously, I am not a highly visible speaker, famous celebrity, former First Lady or former SoS.

[thereismore]

5. The speeches themselves could be completely boring and insignificant.

Why she doesn't release them is anybody's guess. Unless of course they are not that innocuous. Somebody said she was gushing about the financial sector though. And we know already that she blamed homeowners for failing to hold onto the homes.

[JackRiddler]

112. It's probably standard Nixonian paranoia.

The transaction is not in the hot air she produced, but in the $225K per hour cashed. That's already the message - they are giving it and she's taking it. What more needs to be known?

[thereismore]

120. Yes! She is very paranoid. nt

[MADem]

7. Wow, and they think that kind of approach lends gravitas to their concerns?

A dozen or so people yelling?

Who hired that crowd--Trump?

Sounds just like it's from his playbook.

Sample: http://www.buzzfeed.com/mckaycoppins/breitbart-staffers-believe-trump-has-given-money-to-site-for

Things might not always be what they seem..!

[Surya Gayatri]

8. SO impressive. I'm drawn irresistibly to their cause. Must hear more!

And, expressed with such class...

[JustAnotherGen]

9. If HRC and Sanders Supporters

Joined forces against Trump - I think we could see him implode.

By the time the GE comes around and these folks direct their attention to that Monster running on the Republican ticket - they (these occupiers) will be there alone. Alienating allies with this kind of behavior means they aren't going to carry water for you down the road.

ETA - not suggesting they do this - but these 'Occupiers' need to be aware of what they will come up against in the GE. I hope they are taking self defense classes in their free time:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10141375550

[rbrnmw]

25. That Link JAG OMG

He and his supporters scare the hell outta me.

[hootinholler]

10. It would be just like him to stage it in front of Trump Tower

The notion of why make a demand of Hillary from in front of tRump tower, struck me as odd.



I think you may be on to something here.

[MADem]

11. To me, it looks like a two-fer: Shit on Clinton and blame Sanders for doing it.

That way, his orange hands are clean....!!!

It's not like this is his first foray into that kind of manipulation, after all.

Actually, it's a three-fer--he further disparages Sanders by making his supporters look like "outliers" to anyone looking in from "middle America."

[uhnope]

89. This is from The Blaze, as in RW freakazoid Glenn Beck, who is against both Trump & all Democrats

So this would serve to cover all the bases--attack Clinton, make Sanders supporters look bad, and tarnish Trump.

A better question--why is Glenn Beck's agitprop being promoted on DU?

[MADem]

98. Not just a better question, but the best one, I'd say.

Cui bono, ya gotta wonder!

[still_one]

151. I see a lot of similarities between them actually. Bullying and harassing anyone who doesn't

support their candidate.

Now where else have I seen this.......


hmmmmmmmmm

[MADem]

160. In NY and many major cities, the building owner "owns" the sidewalk.

Why was this allowed to happen?

Why isn't Trump Security out there moving those dozen or so schmucks along?

Why weren't the popo called?

This is looking more and more to me like a Trump-SPONSORED event.

After all, how else can you be sure the demonstration will go forward without interruptions?

Hold it on your OWN property.

[EndElectoral]

13. Keep the pressure on the champion of transparency.

[oasis]

16. My advice to the sassy teen. Get "your ass" back to the skateboard park.

[99Forever]

18. Another shining example of Hillarians...

....reaching out to young voters!



Keep up the good work establishment mouth pieces.

[oasis]

21. As if this sassy lass would switch her vote to Hillary. I don't think so.

I'm sure Hill wouldn't want such a person promoting her candidacy.

[retrowire]

34. But Hillary would want people like you to support her

by telling youth to "get their ass back to the skate park?"

You are such a shining example. XD

[oasis]

43. Yes, people who have actually accomplished something in their lives

tend to get taken more seriously.

[retrowire]

45. So you're capable of determining that those in the video

have done nothing with their lives based on how they look and act?

Wow! XD

Please keep digging this hole of yours it's great to watch!

[roguevalley]

52. Oasis, if that's your feelings, what have you accomplished so we can take your words with

greater import?

[retrowire]

82. Yes,

if we're going to go by oasis' requirements for respecting ones opinion, I want EVERYONE'S RESUMES to be posted in their profile so I can review their qualifications before taking them seriously.

You know what I just realized? The people in this video are only asking the same thing of Hillary.

Show us your record Hillary so we can decide whether or not to take you seriously.

[oasis]

117. No transcripts, no resumes. Decide whatever you want.

[oasis]

113. I've accomplished enough to know that a motley group

will get nowhere DEMANDING a damn thing from anyone. That's what you and I both know.

[Fawke Em]

142. By supporting a candidate who won't get the money out of higher education,

you're pretty much guaranteeing that this young woman will have a difficult time accomplishing something in her life.

[99Forever]

92. Yessir, screw allof those whippersnappers and their hoping .

....for something better in their lives. Her Royal Inevitableness doesn't needthem. Besides they won't stay off your lawn

[leftofcool]

38. Or better yet, find a job.

[retrowire]

46. And you know they're unemployed because of...

how they look and act?

Wow, the Hillary Supporters in this thread have magical powers!

[leftofcool]

50. She said she was 16, why isn't she in school?

If she is not in school, shouldn't she be working no matter how she looks?

[grasswire]

59. .......and this is why Hillary and her authoritarians have a big problem...

....with young people.

[retrowire]

63. How is video footage of someone protesting in front of a building

evidence that they don't receive an education.

Hell, you might as well assume she's homeless because CLEARLY, she's not inside of a building during the footage.

[Cavallo]

157. No. There's no rule that says people need to work if they aren't in school.

Maybe it wasn't a school day or she got credit for it in political science like I did in High School.

[roguevalley]

55. sad isn't it? I guess when you know your candidate just shot a hole in their candidacy it limits the

defense you can give them

[Cavallo]

158. They're sounding like they just walked off of Free Republic

with these accusations about Democrats protesting.

[oasis]

48. Isn't this a school day? She says she's 16 years old.

[NurseJackie]

71. As many parents know ... "it's just a phase".

I was young once too. I remember what it was like. I have children of my own. They remember what it was like.

[oasis]

77. Will she ditch classes in the "free" college provided by the revolution?

[retrowire]

78. Did you know that after school,

you leave the school?

Did you know that if you feel passionate enough about something, you could actually leave school as well?

Did you know that home school exists and some parents might say this was an excellent education to allow their child to be politically active?

You do know that don't you?

[timmymoff]

79. all you forgot was "dirty hippie

This, fellow Sanders supporters, is what we are fighting. they want her to get a job but won't acknowledge many of the trade deals supported by their candidate helped those jobs and others go away. Neoliberalism, I will never support that right of center nonsense. Get a job sounded like Archie Bunker or Nixon. You people really are the reason the DNC needs a purging. what type of democrats support fracking so we can pollute our own constituents groundwater. If history proves anything we will also end up paying to clean their messes up. What type of democrat supports this? Hillary supporters, damn, you are just a couple issues away from being Rockefeller republicans, if you aren't to the right of them already. What a disappointing lot you've become.

[dana_b]

103. thank you, thank you!!

you are saying exactly what I was thinking. "Get a job..." sounds like what I've heard from certain people on refrain.
"Hillary supporters, damn, you are just a couple issues away from being Rockefeller republicans,"

[Fawke Em]

145. Did I accidentally wander into Free Republic?

Coz that line sounds suspiciously like something a Republican would say.

[Cavallo]

155. That's exactly what I'm wondering.

[Logical]

149. Classy as usual! nt

[beaglelover]

24. Oh Christ. These idiots are back again??? Yeah, we'll really take what you have to say

seriously when you have purple and blue hair!!!! Grow the fuck up!

[Segami]

27. And what color would you find acceptable?...How about Hillary's hair color?

Would that color suit your eyes better?.....Would that color make her more grown up to your liking?

[beaglelover]

30. Yes, as a matter of fact. Any normal hair color would make the presenter much more credible.

[Segami]

36. LOL!...."normal"?

So you decide what constitutes "normal", and if it doesn't fit your narrow view, you start telling people to grow up.

Thanks for clearing that up for me.....

[beaglelover]

40. You're welcome. Glad I could help.

[retrowire]

41. Yeah that user just showed their "colors"

No respect for people who don't fit their opinion of what constitutes a norm?

lmao. Everyone CONFORM!

[Segami]

53. I'd hate hear what they have to say

about nose, facial, ears & body piercings, tattoos, weaves,.....aah...aaaaaaahhh....

I love living in a very diverse, unique and multicolored world.......Hillarians can stay locked up in StepfordWorld sporting the same hairstyle and color.....

[retrowire]

61. Exactly.

And that's what this kind of ignorant commentary screams of.

How DARE people look any different from a societal norm! Why should we lend our ear to them? THEIR HAIR COLOR IS PURPLE AND BLUE!!!

Their concerns and opinions are only valid when they are given in an acceptable way and in an accepted form?

Reminds me of when people were tone policiing BLM. Geez.

[notadmblnd]

143. I love to see young people express themselves

They'll have plenty of time to become judgmental tight asses when they're older.

[shanti]

146. some of us boomers

even dye our OWN hair in "unnatural" colors. i'm thinking of getting peacock colors in the front of my 'do.

[notadmblnd]

148. I've thought about it recently too!

Blue and purple is what I was thinking. Old Lady blue and purple streaks the color of the first lady that was speaking. My natural color is mousey blond- and grey but I've colored it for years. I still can't bring myself to get what I call the old lady cut. I just cant.

[shanti]

154. yes, blues, purples

and some turquoise. it's just something fun and doesn't last forever.

last month, i got the big chop, and went short. at 60, my hair has been getting thinner and thinner, and is 80% gray. i fought cutting it too, but i just got so tired of the skinny ponytail and scrunchie look, and figured it would look better shorter, and surprise! it does! i wanted a "sharon stone" kind of cut, wispy, as her hair is thinner too. it doesn't feel "old lady-ish". i really love it now, so much easier to take care of. if i had thick hair though, i'd never cut it.

[notadmblnd]

156. I don't know about turquoise

The young man that lived across the street from us dyed his hair turquoise one summer. A couple of times in the pool and it turned a pea green color. He wasn't happy about it and ended up shaving it all off.

I still have a ton of hair. It's has gotten curly as I've gotten older. Not the nice spiral curls, but the old hag kinda curly. I think it's revenge for all those perms in the 80's. So I have to blow dry it straight if I wear it down. But I think it would look really good if I did the blue and purple then I'd have to learn how to do those real thick and dramatic eyebrows that are in style cause I like that look too. I've never had to do anything with my eyebrows except brush them, but I am so glad that that thin, half moon fad is over with now. That look really scared me. Pluck them all off and draw them back on.. eww!

[notadmblnd]

96. Hillary's hair color is not normal for a woman her age

Normal for a woman of her age is grey or white.

[beaglelover]

130. But it is one of the acceptable hair colors among the civilized.

How many lawyers, doctors, professionals do you see going to and from work with blue and purple hair. No wonder these idiots want free stuff from Bernie! They don't care enough about their looks to get a decent paying job.

[notadmblnd]

134. blue hair has been acceptable for old ladies for decades

I've seen blue haired women many many times.

Why do you hate kids?

[Cavallo]

144. AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service

AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service

Mail Message



On Fri Mar 11, 2016, 06:41 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

But it is one of the acceptable hair colors among the civilized.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1471218

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

referring to pro Bernie protestors as idiots. telling them to get a job and get normal looking hair. accusing them of wanting free stuff.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri Mar 11, 2016, 06:54 PM, and the Jury voted 2-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Love the hair! Leave the post and rebut it.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: All 3 sentences are offensive and shouldn't be on Democratic Underground.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: This post demonstrates the ridiculous, judgmental (and frankly right-wingy) attitude of this poster. We should leave it to display their shame to everyone on DU.

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

----------
I am appalled. I guess Hillary Supporters thought this was okay? I wouldn't support it if either side did it.

[Cavallo]

150. Welcome to my ignore. You earned it.

Calling Democrats idiots and accusing them of wanting free stuff and not able to get a job because of their looks, sounds right off of Free Republic. I'm appalled this is allowed on Democratic Underground.

[Unknown Beatle]

165. Yep, you sound like a typical Hillary supporter.

We're just a bunch of lowly peasants to Hillary supporters.

[elleng]

139. That's pretty silly.

[notadmblnd]

140. And so is complaing about purple hair.

nt

[elleng]

141. Right!

[retrowire]

31. Wow, judging people by their looks.

You are a shining beacon of reason aren't you?

[leftofcool]

32. I find them hard to take seriously.

[retrowire]

37. Because they're angry? nt

[leftofcool]

51. No, because she is 16, not in school and not working.

[retrowire]

57. 16 yr olds can hold a job.

How do you know she's not pursuing education?

Oh, you're just stereotyping.

[bvf]

67. I want to see some high school perfect attendance

certificates posted here, stat.

This is ridiculous.

[retrowire]

72. Yes it is.

To demean anyone because of a preconceived notion that they're uneducated is crass and rude.

PLUS, there are thousands of people that don't receive a public education, yet they're smarter than the average person. Some are geniuses. This is so fucking rude and ignorant.

I don't live in a world where I invalidate others opinions based on how they look or what their resume looks like or what their education might be.

[bvf]

83. All true.

It's actually beside the point now, given what you've so properly said, buy there's also a little thing (for better or worse) called a digital academy.

[retrowire]

85. Digital academy? nt

[bvf]

136. I don't know how prevalent they are in different areas

of the country, but the public school IT consortium I worked for some years back here in Ohio operated one and still does. I believe there are others.

It's essentially an on-line charter school that typically supplies students with a laptop and internet connection to take classes from home. Since I didn't directly deal with that part of the consortium (I did IT support and teacher education for the member public school districts), I don't know much about the model, other than that they employ state-certified teachers and the state (as in the usual system) picks up the tab.

[roguevalley]

56. no, because they speak truth and outrage against their queen

[AtheistCrusader]

33. ad hominem

An ad hominem (Latin for "to the man" or "to the person"[1]), short for argumentum ad hominem, is an attack on an argument made by attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument, rather than attacking the argument directly. When used inappropriately, it is a logical fallacy in which a claim or argument is dismissed on the basis of some irrelevant fact or supposition about the author or the person being criticized.[2] Ad hominem reasoning is not always fallacious, for example, when it relates to the credibility of statements of fact or when used in certain kinds of moral and practical reasoning.[3]

Fallacious ad hominem reasoning is normally categorized as an informal fallacy,[4][5][6] more precisely as a genetic fallacy, a subcategory of fallacies of irrelevance.

[SammyWinstonJack]

39. Um yeah...."YOU KIDS GET OFF MY LAWN!

[leftofcool]

54. I think 16 years old girls should really be in school and not on anyone's lawn.

[retrowire]

62. How is video footage of someone protesting in front of a building

EVIDENCE that they don't go to school? Please EXPLAIN.

[arcane1]

76. And get off my lawn!!!1

[Fawke Em]

147. Guess we shouldn't listen to her, either.

Isn't she a Hillary supporter?

[Beacool]

29. Well, it doesn't surprise me coming from the young supporters of Sanders.

Crude....

[AtheistCrusader]

42. It doesn't surprise me you didn't bother watching the video.

[Segami]

65. Well, if you want "surprises" just think 'young Bernie supporters' = Michigan

How was that for a surprise?

[Waiting For Everyman]

74. That's the second good laugh DU has given me this afternoon!

Boom!

[bvf]

137. Here's to more "surprises," too.

Good OP, btw.

[revmclaren]

88. Kind of reminds me of this old movie.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wild_in_the_Streets

Interesting.

[AtheistCrusader]

166. Another contestant that didn't bother watching the video in the OP.

[Ichingcarpenter]

35. I told you this was gonna happen yesterday

We own the internet.

[Jackie Wilson Said]

60. LOVE the passion, I am right there with her, them. I hope they are with ME

in case Bernie loses, or should I say I hope she will be with ME and BERNIE.

As in we both will be supporting Hillary at that point.

I just hope people are not blinded by their passion.

[retrowire]

64. Welp, you can't count on that.

It's just not a guarantee that so many people will switch to Hillary if that happens.

[gordyfl]

68. Hillary Clinton's Opponent Releases His Wall Street Speeches

[Waiting For Everyman]

69. Good.

I'm glad to see they're turning the heat up on her.

It's appropriate that it's her former constituents, New Yorkers.

She said she wanted to be held accountable, but then she doesn't cooperate. What was that, then, a lie? There are too many at this point, they're blurring together into a continuum of crap.

[gordyfl]

80. Hillary Said She'd Look Into It...

http://iwilllookintoit.com/

[uhnope]

81. So you're a Glenn Beck fan? Do you follow The Blaze regularly? I guess DU needs more RW sources

and this provides a nice balance. As in Glenn Beck insane RW Democratic-Party-Hating The Blaze.

Maybe someone will post an attack on Clinton from Stormfront, the neo-Nazi site. Why not?

[retrowire]

91. Discredit the issue because of it's source.

It's a real issue. You can mock the source all day. But I, and many others would love to see the queen of transparency put her money where her mouth is by simply releasing the transcripts.

She tells us all the time that she told them to "cut it out!"

We've got contradicting evidence that she's been buddy buddy with them instead.

And she's got the lowest trustworthy rating of any candidate running.

Know what would solve ALL OF THAT?

Releasing the transcripts.

If she's as golden as she claims then releasing the transcripts would give her a great bump on trustworthiness. We'd see for SURE that she really did do her best to reign in Wall St.

But she doesn't. She laughs it off. She says she'll look into it. She waffles and waffles. She's got everything to gain by releasing them (if they're truly as she claims) and everything to lose by not releasing them.

[uhnope]

94. That sounds like true obsession

like a very emotional, all-consuming fixation. "Queen of transparency"? You're losing control of yourself.

I also want the transcripts released. But I'm not going to go ape-face & join forces with RW freaks like Glenn Beck, or be manipulated by his paid agitprop protesters.

You're aware Glenn Beck hates the entire Democratic party, aren't you?

[retrowire]

99. I am.

And I hope you'll use reason to determine that I'm not standing with Glenn Beck. I'm standing with the protestors. You see, Glenn Beck is just delighted that ANYONE is against Hillary. I'm not delighted. I am angry like the protestors, and I'm merely demanding more from my own candidate. I'm glad you feel the same.

And fine, I'll remove the comment of "queen of transparency." Although I don't appreciate your interpretation of the usage of that term as inferring that I've "lost control" of myself. XD Calm down, your own emotions are pouring over.

That comment is because Hillary is consistently claiming she wants to be held accountable for her record and that she's the most transparent. I'd expect her to have no trouble being transparent about the transcripts then, wouldn't you?

[etherealtruth]

100. We should be embracing right wing sources with zero credibility to try to make a point?

That pretty much discredits whatever the point may be.

[retrowire]

102. Even if the footage is FAKE

which I doubt it is...

The issue is still real.

I very much feel the same as these people. I want a candidate who isn't afraid to show what they told the banks who were responsible for our economic issues.

I'm also in the camp that feels if our candidate is currently under a criminal investigation, they shouldn't be running for President until it's over.

Because if she gets indicted after being nominated... Fuck. What then?

[etherealtruth]

111. How does linking to a deranged right wing source with zero credibility lend itself to discussion?

When one has a legitimate point there will be many legitimate sources ... at no point should it be acceptable to link to something like this.

We are not talking about a legitimate news source that leans right or has a definite conservative bias ... we are talking about the Blaze.


Posting garbage from a site like this does not elevate any candidate ... source does matter

[retrowire]

114. Okay, you can just keep getting distracted by the source then.

You asked...

"How does linking to a deranged right wing source with zero credibility lend itself to discussion?"

It doesn't. And you're the only one who keeps talking about the source. I don't give a shit about the source. The issue is REAL. We heard about this issue LONG BEFORE Glenn Beck got excited for it.

The concern is the issue. Do you like talking about issues? Or are you easily distracted by sources? Do you like pulling attention away from the issues by questioning the source? Because that's what you're doing.

This is a race divided by those who speak about the issues and those who want to dodge them, which side are you on?

[uhnope]

115. I'm not on Glenn Beck's side

[retrowire]

121. i never said you were. nt

[etherealtruth]

126. no not distracted focused on what matters ... source matters

I will discuss information published by a credible source ... I prefer to start from a point of honesty (or credibility).

This is a race divided by those who speak about the issues and those who want to dodge them, which side are you on?

I am on the side of issues and information, which is why discussing something from Glenn Beck's Blaze offers nothing to discuss. When discussing issues i want to start from a valid point. If one wants to discuss the issues discuss them from the vantage point of a progressive democrat .... not Glenn Beck , Stormfront, Takimag or other ridiculous sources.

Source does matter, as does context. I voted for Sanders in the primary (my decision was pretty much a coin toss) ... I stayed away from DU in large part leading up the Michigan's primary because of the ridiculousness and disingeniousness of posts like this and candidate supporters that believe this helps their candidate ... it doesn't. (applies to both candidate supporters)

[retrowire]

127. But in this case, it doesnt.

Because if a right wing source says the sky is blue, would you immediately question the credibility?!?!

because the issue being reported has been proven by numerous sources that ARENT RW.

so, keep distracting yourself with the source. it won't change the issue.

[etherealtruth]

129. Using such a ridiculous source makes the source the issue n/t

[MineralMan]

86. The Blaze.

Nice.

I'm out.

[pinebox]

138. Video is video, facts are facts. It's YouTube.

[Mbrow]

90. FYI

On Fri Mar 11, 2016, 04:46 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

"Get Your Ass Out of the Race": Occupiers DEMAND Hillary Clinton RELEASE Wall Street Speeches
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511469306

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

This vid is from THE BLAZE & its youtube channel. As in Glenn Beck insane RW Democratic-Party-Hating RW website THE BLAZE. DU is doomed if RWers can come in here and post stuff from Glenn Beck fake RW news.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri Mar 11, 2016, 04:55 PM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Agree with the alerter on this one - find a source that's not published by RWNJs.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: We have a poster here who is a contributor to Beck, Newmax and Fox News programs. Should that poster be prohibited from posting here?
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Is the story factual or not? At least this person didn't link to Stormfront, like one prominent Hillary booster did.

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[gordyfl]

93. $675,000.00 for Three Wall Street Speeches...ans then runs for President...?

[Segami]

97. LOL!

Looks like Hillary found Gore's 'lock box'.....

[Purveyor]

95. Courtesy Report: Results of your Jury Service

AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service
Mail Message
On Fri Mar 11, 2016, 04:46 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

"Get Your Ass Out of the Race": Occupiers DEMAND Hillary Clinton RELEASE Wall Street Speeches
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511469306

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

This vid is from THE BLAZE & its youtube channel. As in Glenn Beck insane RW Democratic-Party-Hating RW website THE BLAZE. DU is doomed if RWers can come in here and post stuff from Glenn Beck fake RW news.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri Mar 11, 2016, 04:55 PM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Agree with the alerter on this one - find a source that's not published by RWNJs.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: We have a poster here who is a contributor to Beck, Newmax and Fox News programs. Should that poster be prohibited from posting here?
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Is the story factual or not? At least this person didn't link to Stormfront, like one prominent Hillary booster did.

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[Segami]

101. Thank you......lol!

Oh well....

[etherealtruth]

105. wow, this is very disturbing

DU supporting posts from rightwing sites with zero credibility. What has DU become?

This is like the post linking to Lila Rose's site .... it really makes one wonder what in the world DUers are thinking.

If someone has a valid point there are credible sources .... If one has to settle on something by a deranged right winger you have to wonder why

[retrowire]

108. We get it!

Bad source! Yep.

The point is still real though. So let's talk about that.

[etherealtruth]

116. in this case the source IS the issue

its not possible to validate a point using sources that have no credibility and and a bizarre point of view.


I am not a Clinton supporter (nor am I a Sanders supporter) .... their sum total of positives and negatives are pretty equal. I am not going to discuss 'issue' with either of them presented by bizarre right wing sources with zero credibility.

Lets talk about source ... I have made my point of view lets flesh out yours .... when is it OK to treat a right wing source with no credibility as something that has made an astute point? is it solely when you agree with that point?

[retrowire]

123. heres your answer

if a right wing source says the sky is blue, would you immediately question the credibility?!?!

because the issue being reported has been proven by numerous sources that ARENT RW.

so, keep distracting yourself with the source. it won't change the issue.

[etherealtruth]

128. i understand ... you support right wing and low credibility sources

An oversimplification is not the test.

Do you support right wing sources/ low credibility sources in all cases or just when the ideas being presented seem to comport to your view point?

Is your vision of DU one that frequently links to and celibrates right wing low credibility sources? If so there is really nothing for us to discuss ... as I will not be swayed.

when there are valid points to be made, there are valid sources to be used.

[retrowire]

133. Haha! Wow!

You're accusing me of supporting right wing and low credibility sources? What a stretch!

This is my final message to you.

Your logic is beyond ridiculous. This is your logic right here: "A source tells me something that has been proven to be an issue by multiple sources, even main stream and left wing sources. But now that a right wing source is stating it, the issue at hand is immediately invalid and up for question."

As I already stated in another analogy, using your logic, you would question the idea of the sky being blue if a right wing source said so? I'm sorry. Some things are just true. People are pissed about the transcripts. You can't run from that, and it's not SUDDENLY QUESTIONABLE because a right wing rag says so.

You want other sources that mention people wanting Hillary to release the transcripts? Here ya go..

https://consortiumnews.com/2016/03/07/clinton-stalls-on-goldman-sachs-speeches/

http://vetsforbernie.org/2016/02/petition-hillary-clinton-release-speech-transcripts/

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/02/08/hillary_clinton_won_t_release_transcripts_of_her_paid_goldman_sachs_speeches.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/26/opinion/mrs-clinton-show-voters-those-transcripts.html

Oh no but wait, Glenn Beck is also talking about the issue so it's invalid so let's not talk about it. Right?

Wrong. It's a real issue. You can continue to keep yelling, "BUT LOOK GLENN BECK SAID IT, THEREFORE IT'S STUPID TO TALK ABOUT" and you can continue to ignore the fact that it's an issue that has been EVERYWHERE. But it won't be me that looks like I'm avoiding talking about the issues. It's you.

And accusing me of supporting right wing rags simply because I want Hillary to release her paid speeches? lmao. You're spinning so hard it's hilarious. You literally diverted this conversation into an attack on me because you can't talk about the issue!

Now run along now. I gave you links to places that AREN'T right wing sources that are talking about the issue. You've got nothing to stand on here. I won't be talking to you any further however, because you've proven yourself to be a logic twister with no intent on actually talking about the issue. You just wanna keep discrediting it because of ONE of it's sources.

[etherealtruth]

135. Well you put a lot of effort into this, hopefully someone will read it

My interest is in the right wing sources being used on DU .

The funny part is .... i attack their use without regard to the candidate they are purported to attack or support. I object to these sites use on DU .

The other stuff is irrelevant ... I am very well aware of Clinton's weaknesses and limitations (as I am aware of Sanders). I have already voted ... and will point out these posts do nothing to sway undecided voters and often serve as a major 'turn-off"

I am no Clinton fan ... I wouldn't waste my time with the right wing link ... and am not interested in yours (although you do seem to have put a lot of effort into it, maybe someone else will read it). You were looking for someone to support Clinton (I won't until/ if she wins the nomination) ... I have no interest.

My interest remains the cesspool GDP can be with emphasis in the right wing sources

[Faux pas]

104. K N R-ed

[dana_b]

107. "Get back to the skateboard park "Get a job" "you have purple and black hair...

grow the f-up"

Where AM I?!?!

[retrowire]

109. I was waiting for a post like this.

Thank you for pointing it out in one post. The first knee jerk reaction from Hillary Supporters in this thread were to discredit and judge the protesters based on their age and how they look.

It is nauseating. We are truly not among liberals or open minded folk.

[dana_b]

118. it's fascinating

I just can't reconcile the things that are said now with how things used to be, let's say 10 years ago. I don't feel like I've changed a lot, maybe i have, but some here seem to have changed quite a bit. If that's really who the Democratic party is now, they are going to lose more people if Bernie doesn't win.

[retrowire]

124. exactly

any party that questions peoples motives because of age, hair color or education is no party of mine.

[AtheistCrusader]

167. They did it without even watching the video.

AT LEAST two of them simply assumed the young person in the preview was the person who was 'rude'.

Welcome to the new DU I guess.

[JackRiddler]

110. Reagan Democrats.

Tell me there's a distinction now. In the last week, to her Kissinger association and long pedigree of supporting wars, she has adopted the rhetoric that was used to support the Reaganite death-squads in Central America and now she's proactively whitewashing the Reaganite record on AIDS. No one's making her do either! Neither are vital campaign matters for her. Nor is Kissinger essential to her campaign. She is making her politics plain. She communicates her platform all the time: Wall Street, fracking, new wars, status-quo corporatism, no we can't.

[dana_b]

119. yes, it seems to slip out

from time to time and then she has to backtrack.

[JackRiddler]

125. I don't think it slips.

It's being communicated all the time. She drones the slogans and the codewords about love and equality and then a lot of legalistic tortured syntax about how she's going to frack and build modest fences.

Absolutely nothing progressive sounding that she says now will stick around after the convention.

[IllinoisLabour]

163. There's a large segment of Hillary supporters just like that.

They're old white ladies. I've been told that I'm being dishonest for planning to vote in the Democratic Primary because I'm an Indy to the left of the Dems. I'm not a "real" Democrat.

(in real life, not here; I just signed up for DU today, though, so there's still time)

I don't know what percentage of her base they are, but they're vocal and say some pretty gross things. They're basically Republicans who want pro-choice judges and support for Planned Parenthood.

[pdsimdars]

122. Nice, nice to see real people on the street saying what's on their minds.

[great white snark]

131. One is supposed to lose credibility when using misleading RW propaganda. Here: praise.

Somewhere karma awaits.

[AzDar]

132. K & R

[AtomicKitten]

153. Lack of transparency is cheney'esque & no Democrat should be okay with it.

k/r