Latest Breaking News

Bradical79

(4,490 posts)

60. Shocking!

Reply to 6000eliot (Reply #38)

Tue Jan 19, 2016, 10:34 AM

Jan 2016

I understand though, it is pretty difficult to defend the indefensible.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

68 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Bernie Sanders Doubles Down On Critique of Hillary Clinton's Speaking Fees [View all] Purveyor Jan 2016 OP

That's one of them there substantive issues that puts food on people's tables. Renew Deal Jan 2016 #1

Indeed it is. tabasco Jan 2016 #7

Damn straight it is. cui bono Jan 2016 #10

As I said in another thread tazkcmo Jan 2016 #28

BS enid602 Jan 2016 #67

Good. That $$$$ says exactly who she answers to. CharlotteVale Jan 2016 #2

He Should Further Push Her And Put Her On The Defensive..... global1 Jan 2016 #3

He should also demand that she pledge NOT to put in Goldman Sachs alums. nt antigop Jan 2016 #5

Why should he do that? pangaia Jan 2016 #23

Great point. She needsto release those transcripts. Akicita Jan 2016 #8

Yes! Good idea. cui bono Jan 2016 #11

It's just a source of curiosity Kall Jan 2016 #19

Yes, agree.. Pass suggestion to campaign Voice for Peace Jan 2016 #12

To be a fly on the wall... cannabis_flower Jan 2016 #16

Great idea! Ino Jan 2016 #17

Fell asleep, and woke up in the middle of the night... DirtyHippyBastard Jan 2016 #51

Was she speaking to GS when SOS? wordpix Jan 2016 #53

Yes. The speeches were probably video-taped. We should be given either access to the JDPriestly Jan 2016 #58

I think you are overlooking something ... Nihil Jan 2016 #59

Do they really think her words of wisdom are worth that much? HomerRamone Jan 2016 #4

Well put. tecelote Jan 2016 #21

Most people seem to grasp the issue well, and agree that it's relevant Babel_17 Jan 2016 #6

He needs to keep up the attack! Odin2005 Jan 2016 #9

He needs to tell her to... malokvale77 Jan 2016 #14

... CharlotteVale Jan 2016 #27

Maybe Sanders' age has him confused. Speaking fees are not political donations. KittyWampus Jan 2016 #13

I gotta bridge... nt malokvale77 Jan 2016 #15

Perhaps but.. cannabis_flower Jan 2016 #18

They're worse Cartoonist Jan 2016 #22

Well, you are partly correct. pangaia Jan 2016 #24

If you believe that "speaking fees are not political donations" in this case then I have got a Sam1 Jan 2016 #26

Of course not. All of these firms expect absolutely nothing in return guillaumeb Jan 2016 #29

This is in fact the going rate anigbrowl Jan 2016 #42

Bush 41 & Ultimately Obama After He Leaves Office & Other Famous People I Can.... global1 Jan 2016 #61

But Reagan, and Bush, and Clinton all spoke after being President. guillaumeb Jan 2016 #65

Uh huh, that's right and shareholders love it when wordpix Jan 2016 #55

Wonderful response! HassleCat Jan 2016 #31

As if Bernin Jan 2016 #37

You forgot the sarcasm flag coyote Jan 2016 #40

She is clearly the Democrat they favor. ohnoyoudidnt Jan 2016 #44

Dream on, you don't give that kind of speaking fee and expect wordpix Jan 2016 #54

That is not personal, it's a political attack JackRiddler Jan 2016 #20

Goldman did not give HRC $600,000 cause they like the sound of her voice BadGimp Jan 2016 #25

You Got to Dance with Them What Brung You UpInArms Jan 2016 #30

I miss Molly HassleCat Jan 2016 #32

I always bought the Tuesday Fort Worth Star UpInArms Jan 2016 #68

Oh look, a new line of attack by the Sanders people. 6000eliot Jan 2016 #33

She was paid 600K from one of the banks responsible for the financial meltdown. ohnoyoudidnt Jan 2016 #35

I take it you aren't interested in discussing the issue? -nt Bradical79 Jan 2016 #36

Not in the least. 6000eliot Jan 2016 #38

Of course not coyote Jan 2016 #41

The Bernie supporters care enough for all of us. 6000eliot Jan 2016 #66

Shocking! Bradical79 Jan 2016 #60

What issue? This is in fact pretty normal. anigbrowl Jan 2016 #43

There is a bit of a difference when you may be ohnoyoudidnt Jan 2016 #47

I think you have it backwards anigbrowl Jan 2016 #48

I like to consider the source. ohnoyoudidnt Jan 2016 #49

It's a little baffling that money given directly to an individual politician warrants less concern Bradical79 Jan 2016 #62

This is the problem with Hilary and you'd like to sweep it under the rug i suppose wordpix Jan 2016 #56

But what about other celebrities? How dare you attack Jimmy Carter! I don't want to talk about it! Bradical79 Jan 2016 #64

Well, it is a pretty clear example of our political corruption Bradical79 Jan 2016 #34

Sanders and his peeps should do this every day. It is factual, and therefore absolutely fair game. Indepatriot Jan 2016 #39

Please do. It shows how petty and uninformed his campaign supporters are. anigbrowl Jan 2016 #46

Rationalizations are really all you folks have. Good luck with that... Indepatriot Jan 2016 #50

Just bc they do it doesn't make it right and she's a pres candidate wordpix Jan 2016 #57

Key Words - After He Retires....nt global1 Jan 2016 #63

So she get's paid $600 thou by big banks for a speech: why should there be any quid pro quo? YOHABLO Jan 2016 #45

The truly tragic thing is Chelsea had to "work" for a whole year to earn $600,000 CBGLuthier Jan 2016 #52