Animal’s Daily News

BearsIt seems that a while back Her Majesty Hillary I gave a speech to the Top Men at Goldman Sachs – a speech that netted her a cool $225,000 (in return, one might ask, for what quid pro quo?)  But did she bash those plutocrats a good one, as she’s been doing on the campaign trail?  Not so much.  Excerpt:

Clinton was paid $225,000 in 2013 to speak to Goldman Sachs executives and technology chiefs at an Arizona conference. All told, she made $675,000 for three Wall Street speeches.

Politico has reported that at the Arizona speech, Clinton “spent no time criticizing Goldman or Wall Street more broadly for its role in the 2008 financial crisis,” a posture that is expected of Democrats. Instead of railing against Goldman Sachs and Wall Street as Sens. Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren would if they had the chance, Clinton apparently heaped praise on the company. A person who was present at one of the speeches said her remarks were “pretty glowing about us.”

“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,” this attendee said.

But that’s just one person. Did others hear the same tones of approval? Were the speeches just exercises in back-slapping? Was Clinton clearly signaling that as president she would grant favors to the financial sector in exchange for political support and contributions?

A new report from the Huffington Post offers some deeper insight into what happened behind closed banquet-room doors. It’s enough to make the Sanders’ camp as well as the Republicans downright gleeful. According to a blog post written by an academic, if Clinton were to ever release transcripts of her speeches, “it could end her candidacy for president.”

Excellent BearWe should be so lucky.  From the HuffPo piece:

The reason you and I will never see the transcripts of Hillary Clinton’s speeches to Wall Street fat-cats — and the reason she’s established a nonsensical condition for their release, that being an agreement by members of another party, involved in a separate primary, to do the same — is that if she were ever to release those transcripts, it could end her candidacy for president.

Please don’t take my word for it, though.

Nor even that of the many neutral observers in the media who are deeply troubled by Clinton’s lack of transparency as to these well-compensated closed-door events — a lack of transparency that has actually been a hallmark of her career in politics.

Seriously, HuffPo – what would you expect from a clueless old harridan with a sense of self-entitlement the size of the Virgo Supercluster, whose entire campaign for President amounts Facepalm-bearto two points:

  1. “I have a vagina,” and
  2. “It’s my turn, peasants!”

What I don’t get is why the loony old Bolshevik Sanders isn’t hanging this around Her Royal Highness’s neck like a millstone.  Is he really in this thing or not?  For crying out loud, Bern, she’s wide open, and you know it!  Hammer it home!

Maybe The Bern is really more aptly described as The Flash in the Pan.