General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: The Ed Show: Clinton Was PAID MILLIONS BY BANKS Backing Keystone Pipeline [View all]NanceGreggs
(27,835 posts)Exactly WHAT do you think the speaking engagement contracts said?
"I, Hillary Clinton, do hereby pledge that in exchange for being paid to appear at a speaking engagement, I will do the bidding of those who hired me for said engagement without question."
Seriously???
This "they expect something in return" bullshit is beyond laughable. Let's assume that the CIBC or TD "expected" HRC to do something favourable to their interests. Let's further assume that she doesn't - because why would she?
Would the banks have legal recourse? Could they go to the courts and sue on the basis of, "We thought we were buying this politician, and now she's refusing to play ball?"
Maybe they could go to the MSM: "We understood that by paying HRC for 'speaking engagements' we would get something in return - and we didn't."
Such accusations would only serve one purpose - they would go to prove that Hillary, despite the "expectations" of those who thought they were buying her favours, WAS NOT BOUGHT when all was said and done - the exact opposite of what they'd hope to prove.
The bullshit meter goes to 11 on this type of utter nonsense.