Hillary Clinton should release the transcripts of her speeches to the Wall Street banks

According to the New York Times, Hillary Clinton made $11 million in 2014 and the first quarter of 2015 from 51 speeches she gave to banks, corporations and other interests. Goldman Sachs alone paid her $675,000. She has refused to release transcripts of those speeches.

As Secretary of State, she was the main architect of a U.S. foreign policy focused on making the world safe for investment and exploitation by U.S. banks and corporations. She was and remains a neocon war hawk committed to supporting the neocon goal to gain control of petroleum resources in the Middle East by destabilizing and replacing governments hostile to that goal. See The Project for the New American Century. “We came, we saw, he died,” she said of Muammar Gaddafi, after he was deposed and murdered in Libya. Libya, like Iraq, and soon to be in Syria, is a failed state overrun by Islamic jihadists.

No one knows better than Hillary Clinton that our foreign policy is to use the military to make the world ‘safe’ for U.S. capitalism. That would be the Wall Street investment banks and U.S. corporations.

We have wasted hundreds of billions of dollars pursuing an aggressive and failed policy in the Middle East. Instead of a robust discussion about slashing our military budget in light of our failed foreign policy, our failed wars and our war crimes, Hillary Clinton talks about how we cannot afford single-payer health care and free education, even though citizens in other countries in Europe enjoy those benefits. Of course, they don’t spend billions on their military forces.

Touting her ‘foreign policy experience,’ such as it is, she assures us that ‘incremental change’ is the only way to go.

Nonsense.

Hillary Clinton needs to release those Wall Street transcripts. I want to know what she said to investment bankers eager to know her priorities, her vision of future foreign policy, and the ‘lay of the land,’ so to speak. Goldman Sachs did not pay her $675,000 to hear war stories.

The New York Times said,

Voters have every right to know what Mrs. Clinton told these groups. In July, her spokesman Nick Merrill said that though most speeches were private, the Clinton operation “always opened speeches when asked to.” Transcripts of speeches that have been leaked have been pretty innocuous. By refusing to release them all, especially the bank speeches, Mrs. Clinton fuels speculation about why she’s stonewalling.

I do not trust her and you should not either.

5 Responses to Hillary Clinton should release the transcripts of her speeches to the Wall Street banks

  1. gblock says:

    You know that it’s Congress, not the president, who makes the ultimate decision about what health care we get. It was a major battle to get Obamacare through, and they had to drop the “government option” to do it. It would be next to impossible to get single payer through at this time, and there is a very real chance that there will continue to be a fight to save what we still have. I think that it is hypocritical to lay that failure at HIllary Clinton’s feet. She is simply being realistic on that score.

  2. Two sides to a story says:

    I voted for Bill Clinton and was turned off by his sharp right turn with “welfare reform” and “three strikes, you’re out.” He may be apologetic now, but it’s not enough to get me to vote for his wife. When people talk about how it doesn’t matter whether you vote Republican or Democrat, the Clintons stand as a shining example.

    But I’d rather have the next four or eight years under Hillary than Trump, just sayin’, but hope it doesn’t come to either / or.

    • Malisha says:

      Yep, the Clintons were not the most liberal folks after all; Bill was and still is a Southerner who lives in the Big House and he can play his saxophone all he likes, that doesn’t change what he did. I did try to judge Hillary separately though, because I don’t like judging wives by their husbands’ behavior. So I judged her separately and yep, she’s the one I DON’T want in the White House but I’d take her (or almost anyone) over Trump.

    • I agree. I’ve been opposed to the Clintons for the same 2 reasons, plus NAFTA. We had riots in Seattle about that.

  3. Malisha says:

    I never did trust Hillary Clinton. Of course, I wouldn’t have to trust her at all if she were running against Trump in the general. In fact, ANYBODY running against Trump in the general would get my vote. So I’m wondering whether the transcripts matter, unLESS they will make it more likely that a sizeable # of folks will back Bernie for the nominee. I’m thinking that the content of those speeches is not likely to be a deciding factor at this point because people backing Hillary for the nomination will probably not be much offput by whatever she said to the bankers/dominators. She’s one of them; we all know that; Bernie’s NOT one of them; we all know THAT. I almost think it would be strategically better if she continued to NOT reveal what she said so that more people think, “Hmmm…what’s she hiding?”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: