What Clinton Said in Her Speeches – “She Sounded More Like a Goldman Sachs Managing Director”

Screen Shot 2016-02-09 at 2.50.44 PM

What’s even more interesting is to compare what Hillary said last night to what she stated as a New York Senator in 2008 in the midst of the banker bailout debate. Specifically, as the battle for TARP was raging, she admitted on radio:

“I think that the banks of New York and our other financial institutions are probably the biggest winners in this, which is one of the reasons why, at the end, despite my serious questions about it, I supported it.”

Of course she supported it for the banks. She did it to shore up the people who have bankrolled her entire career and continue to do so. It has nothing to do with terrorism, it has to do with the fact that Wall Street owns her lock, stock and barrel.

– From the post: A New Low – Hillary Clinton Claims 9/11 is the Reason She’s Owned by Wall Street

The following revelation is the last thing Hillary Clinton’s team wanted to emerge at a time when her campaign is in the midst of a complete and total meltdown.

From Politico:

NEW YORK — When Hillary Clinton spoke to Goldman Sachs executives and technology titans at a summit in Arizona in October of 2013, she spoke glowingly of the work the bank was doing raising capital and helping create jobs, according to people who saw her remarks. 

Clinton, who received $225,000 for her appearance, praised the diversity of Goldman’s workforce and the prominent roles played by women at the blue-chip investment bank and the tech firms present at the event. She spent no time criticizing Goldman or Wall Street more broadly for its role in the 2008 financial crisis.

“It was pretty glowing about us,” one person who watched the event said. “It’s so far from what she sounds like as a candidate now. It was like a rah-rah speech. She sounded more like a Goldman Sachs managing director.”

So far, the Clinton campaign has shown no inclination to release the texts of her remarks to Goldman or anyone else. At a debate in New Hampshire last week, Clinton said she would “look into” the matter. A day after the debate, Clinton pollster Joel Benenson told reporters, “I don’t think voters are interested in the transcripts of her speeches.” On ABC’s “This Week” on Sunday, Clinton pushed back even harder on calls to release the speech transcripts.

So Joel Benenson is attempting to use Jedi mind tricks to pretend voters don’t care about this issue, when in reality it is THE issue people care about right now.

Meanwhile, where have we heard the name Joel Benenson before? That’s right, in this post: Peak Desperation – Clinton Campaign Deploys Strategist for Wall Street Mega Banks to Attack Bernie Sanders.

Now back to Politico:

“The big-picture question voters care about is: Who does a politician surround themselves with and will they hold accountable people they have a close relationship with?” said Stephanie Taylor, co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee. “Hillary Clinton would reassure voters if she said she would appoint a Treasury secretary not from Wall Street, an attorney general and SEC chair with a proven record of holding Wall Street accountable, and generally work with Elizabeth Warren to stop the revolving door between industry and government.” 

Of course she would never make such promises, because she is 100% a tool of big financial interests.

Kelleher echoed that sentiment, saying Clinton could blow the speech question off the radar if she could more clearly articulate an approach to Wall Street that would ease anxiety on the left. Previous comments, including that she took the $675,000 from Goldman because “that’s what they offered,” have not done the trick.

The person who saw Clinton’s Arizona remarks to Goldman said they thought there was no chance the campaign would ever release them. “It would bury her against Sanders,” this person said. “It really makes her look like an ally of the firm.” 

Spread this story far and wide. Everybody needs to know where this woman really stands.

She stands with Wall Street and always has. 

For related articles, see:

Former Citigroup Trader Explains How Wall Street Came to Own the Clintons and the Democratic Party

Peak Desperation – Clinton Campaign Deploys Strategist for Wall Street Mega Banks to Attack Bernie Sanders

A New Low – Hillary Clinton Claims 9/11 is the Reason She’s Owned by Wall Street

COMPROMISED – How Two of Hillary Clinton’s Top Aides Received Golden Parachutes from Wall Street

Bought & Paid For – 1/3 of All SuperPAC Donations Have Come from Wall Street

Who’s the Real Progressive? A Side by Side Comparison of Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton’s Lifetime Donors

In Liberty,
Michael Krieger

Like this post?
Donate bitcoins: 35DBUbbAQHTqbDaAc5mAaN6BqwA2AxuE7G

Follow me on Twitter.

1 thought on “What Clinton Said in Her Speeches – “She Sounded More Like a Goldman Sachs Managing Director””

  1. Hillary Donors Helping Chris Matthews’ Wife Into Congress

    MSNBC’s Chris Matthews has been accused by Bernie Sanders supporters of being blatantly one-sided in favor of Hillary and against Bernie Sanders, to the point that thousands of progressives have signed a petition calling for MSNBC to suspend the host of “Hardball” “because of his constant shilling for Hillary Clinton.” The magazine Esquire sharply criticized Matthews’ recent interview with Clinton as “ahistorical and out of bounds” for his attacks on Sanders. Now, research by The Daily Caller reveals that Hillary’s biggest donors are backing Matthews’ wife — Kathleen Matthews — in her congressional race in Maryland, even though many of them don’t even live in the same state, much less the same district, that Matthews is seeking to represent.

    Kathleen Matthews, who worked closely with the Clinton Foundation for four years during her time at Marriott (which she just recently left to enter the congressional race), has blown away her primary opponents in terms of fundraising. By the end of 2015, Matthews had raised $1,569,092, FEC records show. Only one of her eight primary opponents — state Sen. Jamie Raskin — had raised more than $1 million by year’s end.

    Many of Matthews’ biggest donors have close ties to either the Clinton foundation or the Clintons themselves.

    Despite Kathleen Matthews’ close ties with the Clintons, their foundation and their donors, TheDC has not found any instance where Chris Matthews publicly disclosed what some voters might see as a conflict-of-interest. Neither MSNBC nor the Matthews campaign responded to TheDC’s request for comment by press time.

    Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2016/02/09/hillary-donors-helping-chris-matthews-wife-into-congress/#ixzz3zmI5Wb1O

    MSM, ain’t it great?


Leave a Reply