Bernie's selections for the platform committee give speeches for money.

[YouDig]

Cornel West does.
James Zogby does.
Bill McKibben does.

Don't know about Deborah Parker. Keith Ellison doesn't, because members of Congress are prohibited from doing that. Once he's out of congress, I'd guess he will. But for now, he hasn't.

Has there been any outrage from the "speaking fee" crowd about this?

[Eric J in MN]

1. Are the speeches for college students or bank executives? NT

NT

[RandySF]

16. West charged $100/person in Berkeley

to hear him speak at a 'revolutionary' bookstore a few years back.

[Eric J in MN]

18. I don't think that creates a conflict of interest. NT

NT

[notadmblnd]

26. Does Cornell West hold public office?

Can he be purchased by corporations to effect policy in congress or other public office?

There in lies your answer to the OPs question

[AgingAmerican]

33. So he isn't speaking to banks and investment houses?

And he isn't a politician?

[CorkySt.Clair]

38. What a waste of $100

You couldn't pay me a $100 to be in the same room with that petty, Obama hating birthday party clown.

[frylock]

49. Oh noes! Brother West is in the back pocket of big small bookstore!

[One Black Sheep]

2. and none of those are running for president

While Hillary is. So she is held to a different, higher standard. Makes sense to me.

[YouDig]

6. The charge is that speaking fees mean corruption.

Why would Bernie pick corrupt people for the committee?

[One Black Sheep]

9. I think the charge is Hillary may have been unduly influenced by all those quarter million dollar

speeches she gave in front of the big banks and Wall Street firms.

I don't think it is that everyone who gives a speech for money is corrupt.

The charge is concerning Hillary herself, not a general broad brush accusation of all those who give speeches for money.

Also, In Hillary's case, there are also other factors involved that would lead to people thinking this re:corruption, her speeches are just one part of it. There is a bigger picture with all the different pieces fitting together within it.

[YouDig]

11. But those speeches are a small percentage of her earnings.

She could drop all the Wall Street speeches and it would be rounding error. She's Hillary Clinton, people pay to see her speak.

[One Black Sheep]

12. No, those speeches generated much more than that. Millions.

Here is an article I found by a quick goggle search -

The speech in 2013 was one of three Clinton made on behalf of Goldman Sachs. According to public records, Clinton gave 92 speeches between 2013 and 2015. Her standard fee is $225,000, and she collected $21.6 million dollars in just under two years. Clinton made 8 speeches to big banks, netting $1.8 million, according to a CNN analysis.

I bolded the relevant part.

http://money.cnn.com/2016/04/20/news/economy/hillary-clinton-goldman-sachs/

[YouDig]

13. Millions yes, but a small percentaget of the total she earned.

[One Black Sheep]

15. Even if we accept your version on this, like I said, there are other factors

involved. Goldman Sachs and other huge banks and Wall Street firms gave millions upon millions, in addition to those speech fees, to Hilary for her campaign, all her top donors are those type of outfits.

All these pieces fit together into an overall picture, and the picture isn't pretty.

[Armstead]

40. Where did the rest come from? Her book?

[YouDig]

42. Speeches to non-financial institutions, mostly. Her book too, but speeches more.

I was saying that the Wall Street speeches were a small part of it, not that speaking fees generally were a small part. Speaking fees are how both Bill and Hillary made most of their money, but the were to a lot of different kinds of institutions.

[anotherproletariat]

17. "I think" automatically disqualifies the rest of your post as opinion. nt

[One Black Sheep]

19. Yes, just about every post I make will be my opinion

I thought that was obvious. Nowhere am I claiming I hold the ultimate truth, trust me.

[morningfog]

25. You haven't thought that through very well.

Or you are just doing your usual.

[AgingAmerican]

34. That's the definition of a 'Strawman' fallacy

Make up a position then attack it.

[2cannan]

3. Are they thinking of running for Pres of US? nt

[Rosa Luxemburg]

4. and probably not paid a lot

[YouDig]

7. Not as much as Hillary, for sure. She's Hillary, they are small time.

But the charge is that speaking fees mean corruption. Why is Bernie picking corrupt people?

[ljm2002]

29. No, the charge is that when you intend to run for President...

...and you rack up speaking fees of nearly a quarter million a pop... that suggests possible corruption.

The thing is, Hillary Clinton is a consummate player in a corrupt system. Maybe she is not more corrupt than any other player, just better at raking in the $$$ from it.

But the system is corrupt, as anyone can see. Thus, the system must change. And we can hardly expect the kind of change we need from someone who profits from the system; who actually helped to set up the current system.

[Tarc]

5. Both Zogby and West are supporters of Israeli divestment

They do not belong within a mile of the Democratic convention.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

22. real progressives, you guys have been keeping us out for years

But yet, there they are.

[Tarc]

23. anti-Zionism is not a progressive trait, I'm afraid

[ljm2002]

30. Yet anti-Semitism is tolerated on DU...

...and its practitioners are allowed back to spew their filth time and again. In fact, some are celebrated here.

[QC]

58. You can even choose an Odin's Cross avatar here,

as many have, including several hosts.

[ljm2002]

64. Yep. Amazing what will be tolerated...

...as long as they make the "right" political points that is.

[QC]

65. You got that right. n/t

[Viva_La_Revolution]

31. pro human is not anti zionist. I am agnostic, so i have no religion filter to try and see thru

It's clear as day that Israel is commiting horrible human right abuses against the palestinians. The recent political resignations show that our support has only made them bolder. Clinton's cozy friendship with Netanyahu is is one of the top 10 reasons i don't want to vote for her.

[Tarc]

35. "Israel is commiting horrible human right abuses against the palestinians"

That's where I stop reading.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

43. no skin off my back. several other readers did tho

[Tarc]

54. I'm sure those "several other readers" express similar anti-Zionist sentiments

But these sentiments are completely out-of-step with the American electorate.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

55. i don't base my morals on what other people think

[Tarc]

60. Your morals are nonexistent if you equate Israel's acts of self-defense

with Palestinians' acts of terrorism.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

66. they both commit terrorist acts, both are wrong

Once you ask why, and truly listen to the answers, you will understand that "self defense" is mostly propaganda

[Tarc]

68. You can remain on the fringe of the fringe if you like

Th rest of us will keep a light on for ya...

[SidDithers]

28. West is an anti-Semitic piece of shit...

He was virtually the only speaker of note at the Million Muslim March, on Sept 11 2013, in Washington. That event was created and hosted by Kevin Barrett, a truly loathsome individual who runs TruthJihad.com, which is a CT site that blames virtually everything on The JOOOOOOS. Barrett also features prominently at Gordon Duff's hate site Veteran's Today.

Here's West at the Million Muslim March, speaking to the dozens of dumbasses who attended.



And with Barrett



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


Anyone with a shred of decency would have stayed a Million Miles away from that event. West embraced it.

Sid

[azurnoir]

48. so is Bernie Sanders antisemitic too? - the march was renamed "Million American March Against Fear"

On July 16, 2013 US News reported that the 'Million Muslim March' had been scheduled for September 11 by 9/11 conspiracy theorists. On August 15, 2013 MD Rabbi Alam appeared on the Fox National News with Sean Hannity, to defend the Million Muslim March against the host.The following day, US News reported that it had been renamed as the "Million American March Against Fear" On August 17, Fox News reported that AMPAC had faced a backlash for planning the march.

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

[SidDithers]

50. Did I say Bernie was antisemitic?...

Are you not able to read the words that are actually in my post?

Sid

[azurnoir]

52. yes I read the words and that is why I asked

unless you had some other reason to bring up West other than that he is a Sanders supporter, otherwise why bring West into the conversation?

[SidDithers]

53. West is brought up in the OP...

West is, partly, the topic of the thread.

Should I be talking about someone else, in a thread about Cornel West?



Sid

[azurnoir]

57. why was West brought up by the O? or how is it that West is going to be on the platform committe are

here you are stating that West is anti-semitic

Star Member SidDithers (40,524 posts)
28. West is an anti-Semitic piece of shit...

He was virtually the only speaker of note at the Million Muslim March, on Sept 11 2013, in Washington. That event was created and hosted by Kevin Barrett, a truly loathsome individual who runs TruthJihad.com, which is a CT site that blames virtually everything on The JOOOOOOS. Barrett also features prominently at Gordon Duff's hate site Veteran's Today.

Here's West at the Million Muslim March, speaking to the dozens of dumbasses who attended.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=2092678

[Octafish]

63. SidDithers of DU has used that smear on me over the years on DU.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026057449#post186

I don't appreciate it, but that's what he does.

He also smeared Naomi Klein "as a bit of a drinker" from college.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022146890#post82

Other than that, I can't think of anything SidDithers has posted, other than trying to smear Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.

[SidDithers]

69. Yeah, well you've got a long and storied history of legitimizing authors who are...

homophobes, racists and anti-Semites. You do it every time you promote the writings of the likes of Paul Craig Roberts, Christopher Bollyn, Wayne Madsen etc.


I have no tolerance for homophobes, racists or anti-Semites. I'd like to think that all DUers would feel the same way. Unfortunately, history at DU has proven me wrong over and over.

Sid

[Octafish]

70. Of course if that were true, you'd show where.

For years, you've smeared me.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022073759

[SidDithers]

71. And for years, I've linked to your posts...

where you've promoted the writings of Paul Craig Roberts, Wayne Madsen or Chritopher Bollyn.

And yet you continue to pretend that those posts don't exist.



Sid

[Octafish]

72. No, you haven't.

I've asked you, repeatedly over the years, to show what you term my "propensity for promoting and legitimizing the work of noted bigots, racists, homophobes and conspiracy theorist lunatics. You're a guy who thinks white-nationalist Paul Craig Roberts and insane homophobe Wayne Madsen are credible, and appropriate sources for use on a progressive message board."

Seeing how you fail to actually show any of that, I want these to be in the record for all DU to see:


Where I quoted Roberts when he supported Don Siegelman:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022073759


Where I quoted Madsen recently to document the business links between Bush and bin Laden:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6059251


Where I first quoted Madsen on DU2 in 2003 (earlier examples exist, but none so illustrative):

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x610051


Where I quoted Bollyn, in reference to the Bush-bin Laden connection BEFORE 9-11

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=3493251&mesg_id=3497283


Where you smear Naomi Klein, making me think the practice is your speciality:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5318151


You will note that I did not support any theory, smear, or lie; I only posted what these people wrote. And as far I as I knew or know, none of these people are anything like what you describe, SidDithers of DU.

PS: Bookmark this thread. You must've missed the last couple of times you spread the same smear:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026178887#post110

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026398318#post401

[SidDithers]

67. I stand by my comments and my opinion of West...

I don't like the anti-Semitic shitheads at TruthJihad.com, nor those who make the conscious choice to legitimize them by participating in their events.

Obviously, YMMV.

Sid

[think]

8. What potential conflicts of interest exist for the speakers that may influence

their decisions as a public servant?

That's why Hillary's speeches are being called out as you obviously know yet you casually trot out this false comparison. That's just sad....

[riderinthestorm]

10. I'd bet big $$ they'd happily release their transcripts too. Hillary? Never.

Why? Because they aren't saying one thing in private versus what they say in public.

[Dems to Win]

14. They are not cashing in on their government service, as the Clintons did

They are not running for high pubic office, with the potential ability to reward those who have rewarded them handsomely for a speech, as Hillary is.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

20. they aren't running foer prez

Keep digging, you have a month to try to find some real dirt.

[mac56]

21. Subtle.

[morningfog]

24. Are the recordings and/or transcripts hidden?0

[Mike Nelson]

27. Chances are...

...when this is over, Bernie will be commanding YHUGE speaking fees!

[AgingAmerican]

32. And?

Do they give speeches to Goldman Sachs?

"Giving speeches for money" isn't the problem, as you well know.

[Bluenorthwest]

36. So do I. Every word a matter of public record not a thing to hide and I'm not asking for the

public's trust at all. It's not being paid to speak that is the issue, it is the taking of towering fees from groups that have their own agendas and then not sharing the material with those of us who do not have the same agenda as those groups. A public servant, when asked what they said in a speech, should never hesitate to share what they said. Ever.

[YouDig]

37. Bernie has alleged, in ads and in speeches, that speaking fees are a form of corruption.

And now he's chosen three people who have done that very thing to represent him in crafting the party platform. It's as hypocritical as it gets. Has Bernie demanded that Cornel West release every transcript of every closed-door speech he's ever given? That could be fun, actually, he's already said some outrageously offensive things, but I can only imagine what he says when he thinks nobody will ever find out. Does Bernie not think that the people deserve to know who has been paying Cornel West to speak, and how much, and what he's been saying behind closed doors?

No, he's not going to ask that. Asking for Hillary's speech transcripts has always been a political stunt, he just wants to dig through and find stuff to take out of context to make a press release out of. It has never been customary for candidates to release records of private affairs.

What has been customary is to release complete tax returns for several years, which Bernie hasn't done. And Berners have no problem with that, which makes it plain that they don't actually care about transparency.

[Armstead]

39. Have you ever taken a creative writing class?

You're really talented.

But to answer your point, non of them are running for president, or any public office. And if they were to do so, the content of their speeches would certainly be fair game, though I don't think someone like Bill McKibben is likely to tell Wall St. how wonderful they are.

[YouDig]

41. They were selected by Bernie to help craft the Democratic platform.

And he's made it clear that he thinks speaking fees are a form of corruption. He even ran an ad calling speaking fees part of the rigged economy.

So by his own logic, he has picked corrupt people to help shape the platform.

[Armstead]

44. I'd give this an A+ in Advance Fiction

Brilliant creative fiction, but falls way short of the mark in reality.

Bernie has never said making speeches is wrong. MY guess is that when and if he ever retires from elected office, he'll be doing some of that himself.

And those people he chose have nothing personally to gain from policy except to advance their beliefs. If Bill McKibben, for example were able to influence the Democrats to take a strong stance on the need for sustainable practices to address climate change, that is not putting a penny in his pocket.

[YouDig]

45. He said that speaking fees are part of the rigged economy. For example in this ad.

"Wall Street banks shower Washington politicians with campaign contributions and speaking fees," the ad says. "And what do they get for it? A rigged economy, tax breaks and bailouts, all held in place by a corrupt campaign finance system. And while Washington politicians are paid over $200,000 an hour for speeches, they oppose raising the living wage to $15 an hour. $200,000 an hour for them, but not even 15 bucks an hour for all Americans. Enough is enough."
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/apr/20/bernie-s/bernie-sanders-ad-ignores-fact-members-congress-ca/

I guess his standard is that it's wrong for Hillary to take speaking fees, but it's OK for Cornel West. Makes sense to me.

By the way, Hillary also has nothing personally to gain from policy except to advance her beliefs. No more or less than Cornel West does.

[Armstead]

46. There is a huge difference.....

But i haven't the time to explain the obvious.

[YouDig]

47. There's always some excuse. Same as how all the states Bernie loses don't count for whatever reason

[dchill]

51. This is helpful, how?

Where are the transcripts?

[MattP]

56. I like Zogby but West shouldn't be and shouldnt want to be at the DNC

West isn't a Democrat so why be on the platform committee

[merrily]

59. Are West, Zogby and McKibben runninng for public office? IF SO, did they get $6 million from

Wall Street last year?

Bernie never said it's wrong for anyone to give speeches for money under all circumstances. Conflating that much is a sign of dishonesty or inability to make distinctions that are essential to analysis.

[Octafish]

61. Did any of them steer business toward's Bernie's Foundation and Global Initiative?

Take UBS.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511200048

[cherokeeprogressive]

62. Who gives a flying fuck.