
Hillary Clinton's Wall St Speeches Published by Wikileaks - JohnHammersley
http://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2016-37595047
======
xapata
I've only seen a few quotes from these leaked transcripts, but they've been in
articles claiming very damaging statements. Instead, the quotes seem to be
mostly benign comments and nothing shocking.

~~~
williamgb
I've noted several negative reactions toward Clinton based on prior leaks from
people who had simply inferred wrong-doing on the basis that the most notable
leaks tend to reveal duplicity. This handful of people whom I have observed
felt it unnecessary to actually delve into the documents before passing
judgment.

Anecdotal, but I'm convinced I'm not the only person with this experience.

~~~
pdkl95
You're missing the forest for the trees.

Did Clinton take money (either for herself _or_ for her campaign _or_ for her
foundation, it doesn't matter which) from businesses that are canonical
symbols of Wall Street money and power? Then she's tainted in the eyes of
everybody that is against corporate influence on politics. The contents of the
speech isn't particularly important, because it is the influence of money that
matters.

Stop looking for traditional political "scandals", and start noticing the
anti-corporate-power, anti-globalism revolt that is causing a lot of people to
vote "anybody but the usual bribed politicians".

~~~
treebeard901
It is clear she took money from many people because they hired her to give a
speech. This isn't really in debate. The core question is whether the money
will influence her policies. Giving a speech doesn't mean you're bribed or
influenced by default. The content of the speech is very important, so it's
good we are seeing what was said.

~~~
pdkl95
> Giving a speech doesn't mean you're ... influenced by default.

No, but taking a large amount of money does. Even if you believe you aren't
taking money for a "bribe" and maintain some level of independence in the
actual content of your speech, there is a significant unconscious bias. If you
want to get that kind of job again, you might not be as critical of the people
paying you.

> The core question is whether the money will influence her policies.

Approach the question from the other side. No for-profit business is going to
give large sums of money out without some expectation of a return on that
investment. Someone is betting that they will be able to get more money having
the ear of a politician than their other investment opportunities.

------
potrebitel
Pardon my ignorance, but I cannot help myself understanding why WikiLeaks are
pushing so much crap towards Clinton and not doing the same to Trump ?

Are they in-directly supporting Trump ?

I am far from USA and although who will be the next president most likely will
affect everyone, I do not care that much for either one of them.

It is just strange for the russians to push so much for Trump and WikiLeaks
are somehow assisting them.

~~~
williamgb
One could ask a similar question about most media vendors, replacing Trump
with Clinton. WikiLeaks, whether deliberately or not, is simply doing its part
to redress the balance in negative and scandalising news coverage.

It should be made clear that I am neither a US citizen nor a Trump supporter.
Huge emphasis on the latter!

~~~
matt4077
That's based on a flawed notion of balance, the idea that news media should
publish equal amounts of "negative and scandalizing news".

It's flawed in that it assumes that equal amounts of such information exist.
When Trump shoots some grandmother in the face, people expect equal prominence
for "Hillary came to my house and left the bathroom light on".

Parts of the news media have been bending over backwards to avoid the
appearance of partisanship, which gave us the endless faux-scandal regarding
her mailserver.

The same principle leads to news media sometimes creating the impression that
global warming is some sort of scientific debate, because they feel the need
to give equal billing to the doubters while reality is 99-1 lopsided.

Trump may actually have a positive impact in the end, in that he may stretch
the concept until it breaks. Indeed we can see it breaking down in the last
few weeks with, for example, newspapers publishing harsh editorials and
endorsements against him whereas they remained quite in previous elections.

If the current trend could continue for another six months, we'd see every
article in every newspaper end with "cetero censeo Trump delende est"

------
gremlinsinc
"After the dust has settled in this election, the divisions within the
Democratic ranks will likely re-emerge" \-- as a lifelong
democract/progressive I can say honestly that the divisions have NOT been
mended for this election.

I'm supporting Jill Stein even though I feel she's a little over the top
personality wise and a little odd. Bernie was the right amount of crazy
progressive while working within the confines of what he was given. I will
never support another Democrat until the party is ripped a part or totally
reformed. Case closed. The only exception are ones that run under against
trade, have strong climate change policies, and are against corporate money
and corruption in politics.

We desperately need to pass the anti-corruption act on a national level
getting all corporate donations out of politics. Money is a 'vote' and
corporations should not have a say it's "we the people" not "we the
corporations and a few people who we allow to matter".

------
drinchev
Can someone elaborate how pro-globalization speech can hurt her campaign?

As far as I can see the leaks are not corruption evidence of some sort.

Disclaimer I'm away from politics and US.

~~~
pdkl95
There is a rapidly growing group of people that are tired of the status quo.
They are reacting strongly against the neoliberal and technocratic
establishment. To the very large masses of blue collar workers, globalism
means watching their jobs move to cheaper markets.

This is the environment where populist movements arise, which are not tied to
traditional right/left politics. Hence the rise of populists like Trump, anti-
establishment reactions like brexit, and a long list of similar movements that
have been popping up around the world.

For a good explanation of this (with charts!), see Mark Blyth's recent
lecture[1].

[1]
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bkm2Vfj42FY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bkm2Vfj42FY)

------
freddref
"Mrs Clinton told bankers that they were best-placed to help reform the US
financial sector" \- which is true, but she failed to mention that was also
the problem.

Bankers are in the best position to reform, but the most unlikely to provide
meaningful reform.

edit: formatting, emoticon removal

------
adam12
Not one mention of this on CNN or MSNBC this morning. It disappoints me how
rigged this election.

edit 1: It is however on their websites. The Clinton campaign was smart to
counter attack. I still would expect them to cover this on tv, though.

edit 2: CNN is covering it now.

------
extra88
So this is the result of a pretty recent hack. Publishing the speeches
would've done a lot more harm early in the primaries, making it harder for
Clinton to shift her emphasis (and occasionally positions) in response to
Sanders.

~~~
tmalsburg2
You're assuming that whoever leaked this primarily wanted to harm Clinton but
the alternative is that they want to help Trump, which is not the same thing.
In the latter case, the timing is perfect.

~~~
ap22213
This election has been so bizarre that I now believe that none of it has been
by chance.

I dislike conspiracy theories, but lately I've actually been wondering if
something really heavy has been brewing in the basement of the illuminati.

~~~
adiabatty
I can't imagine that they all are of one mind on which candidate is better for
them, assuming such a group exists and meets in secret.

~~~
ap22213
It's pretty clear to me that Trump is the ideal Putin-like character. He just
took out an entire political party like it was nothing. When he destroyed Jeb
Bush with almost no effort, I was convinced that he would win the presidency,
easily. My liberal friends thought I was crazy. But, at this point, there's
nothing that can be done but enjoy the ride.

The US is an economic and military superpower that has been ripe for the
taking for decades. It has a weak, fractured, and anemic culture and political
environment. And, while internally its citizens bicker about the edge cases of
wedge issues, it has been easy to inject Trojan horses and more political
instability.

------
Dowwie
So.. what is the worst that has come out of these speeches? Clinton probably
withheld the speeches to disarm her opponents, not because she said something
so outrageous that in itself would destroy her chances of presidency.

~~~
tmalsburg2
She needs Bernie Sanders' supporters but for these people the transcripts show
that Clinton is the devil, friends with Wall Street, not trustworthy, etc.

------
thaw13579
Meta-question, is this considered on-topic for HN? I wonder how it is
distinguished from another notable leak about another candidate that hasn't
made the front page.

~~~
r721
It just depends on the amount of user flags and whether there is a relative
lot of comments (when points < comments "flame war" detector is usually
triggered).

P.S. I recommend
[https://news.ycombinator.com/active](https://news.ycombinator.com/active) for
the biggest discussions.

------
microcolonel
Does anyone think that if the corporate news media, owned almost exclusively
by avid Clinton supporters, would hold _anything_ back on Trump if they had
it? Maybe there's just more data on Clinton, dirty or clean.

It's amazing how quickly they blame Russia. Russia may be a shrewd
international manipulator, but that doesn't mean that every time data come out
on the Clintons, they're from some 400 pound dude in the Kremlin.

Have people considered that Trump has had considerably less public
interaction, and is not tied to as many organizations as Hillary is? I mean,
there could be lots of good reasons why all the dirt we can find is on her.

~~~
PeterStuer
"Does anyone think that if the corporate news media, owned almost exclusively
by avid Clinton supporters, would hold anything back on Trump if they had it?
Maybe there's just more data on Clinton, dirty or clean.". It is all a matter
of timing releases for maximal impact or damage control, so yes, they hold
back data until it is needed. Do you think the timing of the Trump sexist
video release is coincidental and unrelated to these Clinton speech releases?

~~~
douche
What I've seen of the Trump soundbites is pretty tame, if people are going to
be honest and cut the hypocritical faux outrage. Moreover, it seems like an
idiotic angle to play if it was orchestrated by Clinton's camp, given old
Billy's escapades over the years.

------
Upvoter33
i suspect Assange is going to be enemy #1 of the Clinton administration...

~~~
microcolonel
Already the enemy of most national governments, with a personal vendetta from
the most powerful secret agencies in the world... Yeah, Julian is probably
going to be captured and tortured if he hasn't already been.

------
hayksaakian
what systems are in place to prevent posts like this one from disappearing off
the front page thanks to flag brigades?

------
AlexCoventry
Anyone got a link to the transcripts?

~~~
adam12
Check out wikileaks on twitter.

[https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/784572142444740615](https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/784572142444740615)

~~~
AlexCoventry
I'd really like to see the full transcripts.

~~~
adam12
As far as I know, there are only excerpts.

------
icantdrive55
Nothing game changing, but she's obviously very happy with the current status
of this--great economy, and our wonderful foreign leaders. These fair,
moralistic, truthful, immune to corruption Foreign leaders.

"My dream is a hemispheric common market, with open trade and open borders,"

Yes--it worked well for her, and the wealthy.

It hasen't helped me much? Oh, wait----I'm waiting on 6 X 6v halogen bulbs for
my microscope. They are coming from China. It's been 26 days. They cost me
$9.99. Free shipping picked up by the Chinese government. If I get them; I
will have benefitted! Yea!

"Mrs Clinton told bankers that they were best-placed to help reform the US
financial sector."

Oh really? Banks won't lend to me. They raised my fees to jaw dropping levels.
I sometimes wonder why I even have a bank account.

I probally won't vote this year. I don't think it will matter who gets into
office. Part of myself is hoping for Trump. He will throughly piss everyone
off, and maybe we can regain some democtractic congressional seats?

As to the all important Supreme Court nominees; just because they go in
conservative, doesn't mean they won't do a bed flip while in office? History
has proved this, or at least that's what Dr. Helbright said in political
Science 101 in that hot classroom years ago. I did double check his claim, at
the time. Why did that conservative justice (Robert's) save Obamacare? They
are not robots. They seem to get more understanding with age? It's not so
black/white when in their glory days, with the exception of Clarance Thomas.
He is quite the consistent guy?

I'm not a Rebublican, or Democrat. I'm still waiting for the right
party/person. And it's not that other idiot. Forget his name, but my goodness
--is he fried, or just ------?

