CNN - Wall Street has made Hillary Clinton a millionaire (many times over)

Svnla

Lifer
Nov 10, 2003
17,986
1,388
126
Clinton made $3.15 million in 2013 alone from speaking to firms like Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs, Deutsche Bank and UBS, according to the list her campaign released of her speaking fees.


While Clinton has given paid speeches to many groups, Wall Street banks and investment houses made up a third of her speech income.

She even made more money speaking to UBS and Goldman Sachs than her husband Bill did. Goldman Sachs in New York paid Bill $200,000 for a speech in June 2013 and Hillary $225,000 for a speech in October of that year.


Hilary/Democrat party is working hard for the average working men and women, eh? :biggrin:

http://money.cnn.com/2015/10/13/inv...n-wall-street/index.html?section=money_latest

Hilary and Bill earned more than $25 million USD from speeches = http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...on-earn-more-than-25m-for-giving-100-speeches

Edit:

Hillary bashed Wall Street = http://www.dailyfinance.com/2015/07/13/hillary-clinton-bashes-wall-street-pledges-income-equality/

MotherJones' article about Hillary and one of WS largest firm = http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/06/hillary-clintons-goldman-sachs-problem

Let see, bashing WS on one hand while handing out the other hand to get BIG money from them.


How many WS fat cats being in jail from the Great Recession under this Democrat administration? How many? How about zero, nada, zip.

D or R, they are two sides of the same coin, working for the stinking rich.

Look like typical 1% folks to me.
 
Last edited:

shira

Diamond Member
Jan 12, 2005
9,500
6
81
How can any physician who isn't poor effectively treat the poor?

How can any attorney who isn't poor effectively represent the poor?

How can any philanthropist effectively give money to the poor?
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
33,123
16,331
136
Apparently you can't be rich and be dedicated to helping the average American. Is that the point you are trying make?

Retarded logic from a retarded OP.
 

kage69

Lifer
Jul 17, 2003
29,933
43,472
136
Idk, it is kind of topical seeing as how she admitted to being flat broke in the not too distant past. This update would seem to indicate the Clintons have regained their financial footing and are once again part of the wealthy majority within politics. Good to know, even if pretty much everyone already assumed as much.

I doubt this will change any opinions on if Hillary is part of the Wall Street friendly, money worshiping political establishment or not. This was in doubt? The accusation of trolling does seem appropriate given OP makes no mention of her voting record with regard to supporting 'the average working men and women.' Hrmmmm.

Let us know if she starts charging wounded vets for appearances. That would be the sign of a true bag of douche.

Until then, yes, politicians do lecture circuits, speeches, and write books to advertise their views as well as make money to support themselves and political campaigns. That doesn't just automagically invalidate past support for bills that actually do benefit the middle class though, you get that right?
 
Last edited:

Strk

Lifer
Nov 23, 2003
10,197
4
76
The Clintons have made somewhere around $100 million from speaking fees. A lot of it was from banks. One of the last things Bill did was repeal Glass-Steagal, which helped those banks.

Here is what I don't get. The right is going nuts over trying to prove Clinton isn't what people assume she is. A lot on the left are aware she isn't progressive, she is a hawk and she is a supporter of big business, which is why Sanders is doing as well as he is while receiving no support from the DNC (how many DWS threads have we just had?). People seem to be in agreement that she is full of it.

Sadly, a lot don't realize that, which is where Clinton's support seems to stem from. At least on this board it seems those of us on the left are aware of that. I don't really see any big Clinton supporters, although there are a lot for Sanders.
 
Nov 8, 2012
20,842
4,785
146
Apparently you can't be rich and be dedicated to helping the average American. Is that the point you are trying make?

Retarded logic from a retarded OP.

I think the better point is that she is SPEAKING at banking corporations that are gigantic.

What do you think she is saying at her speeches? "Goldman Sachs, you need to be paying more taxes into the system". Of course not, she is catering to them and has absolutely zero interest in the poor. Why would they PAY her to screw them over in taxes? It makes no sense, dolt.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,682
136
How can any physician who isn't poor effectively treat the poor?

How can any attorney who isn't poor effectively represent the poor?

How can any philanthropist effectively give money to the poor?

Aww, man, you done spoiled everything. They wuz just starting to to get their freak on.
 

sportage

Lifer
Feb 1, 2008
11,492
3,162
136
SUCH BULL - SHET !!!!!

I heard on CNN or maybe it was Fox from one of their boneheads that "HILLARY HAS A EMBARRASSMENT WITH HER WEALTH".
WTF!!!
Hillary DOES NOT have a problem or embarrassment (as was implied) with her/the Clinton's wealth what-so-ever.
The problem is.... OTHERS have a problem with her wealth.
Because Hillary is a woman, and a woman running for president, political pundits feel or believe Hillary should be touchy or have some embarrassment simple because she has wealth.

And Hillary once said, or was it Bill, that after they left the whitehouse they were practically broke. Which makes sense AND does NOT even matter in itself to anyone one way or the other how the Clinton's qualified or justified their status of finances after leaving the whitehouse.

Every other past president, ALL OF THEM, never had to answer about their wealth before nor after THEIR presidency.
Gee... I wonder why?
It wouldn't be, possible be, because Hillary just happens to be A WOMAN, now would it?
And... a woman running for president?

GW surely had a stash full of loot before, during, and after his presidency.
And most of it, if not all of it, coming from OIL.
I have never seen anyone in the media holding GW Bush, or Jeb, or daddy Bush's feet to the fire over their great wealth.

But... just because ""SOMEONE"" in the media dare suggest Hillary "should" have some sore spot, hold some embarrassment over her wealth, claiming she does, then that same media person spin their false accusation into a fact of point that Hillary shares and has personal guilt over, is exactly TOTAl BULL-SHET.

See how they do this, how they play this game, the republican political talk show pundits, putting a lie out there about someone, something, then further drawing their false conclusion that the victim in question SHARES THIS GUILTY?
Guilt that was full on baloney in the first place?

It would be as if someone said about you, out of the blue and for no justified reason, "oh, that anandtech forum member doesn't talk about child molestation." Then this same person puts out there their conclusion... "yep! that anandtech forum member has an embarrassment over child molestation (hint hint - wink wink)".

See what they did?
They "THEY" created this false suggestion that YOU and child molestation should somehow be linked together. THEN they go even further by implying that, "YOU have an embarrassment over child molestation".
This is gutter politics, and gutter tabloid media at its worse.

Actually, thinking about it, I believe this was from CNN, and from that fat republican retarded Hispanic congressional chick that thinks Jeb is the best thing since sliced bread.
And Hillary? Pure evil.
Maybe you know her name? I don't even care to take time to google it.
She's a real idiot.
She guests on a lot of the political TV shows, and every time just exposes how ignorant she really is.

And WHY any black or Hispanic would support republicans, especially a Jeb or any of the others, is beyond logic.
After all, WHAT ever have republicans done for Hispanics OR blacks?
Do they really believe a republican president would be in their BEST interest?
Or do one thing as president with supporting their cause or quest for just equality?
And do they really believe Abe Lincoln, if alive today, would align with the current republican party?
No way. Old Abe would be full on DEMOCRAT!

So, no!
Hillary has no embarrassment nor should she need address the Clinton's wealth past present nor future.
And by-the-way, a woman, ANY woman, has just as much right to be wealthy as any man.
And THAT also goes for women running for the presidency.

Don't get me started ;)
.
.
.
 
Last edited:

IGBT

Lifer
Jul 16, 2001
17,964
140
106
Big Business and Big Gov. all know the democrat party is the "money on the top" party. It's not your grandfathers democrat party.
 

Svnla

Lifer
Nov 10, 2003
17,986
1,388
126
Hillary bashed Wall Street = http://www.dailyfinance.com/2015/07/13/hillary-clinton-bashes-wall-street-pledges-income-equality/

MotherJones' article about Hillary and WS = http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/06/hillary-clintons-goldman-sachs-problem

Let see, bashing WS on one hand while handing out the other hand to get BIG money from them.


How many WS fat cats being in jail from the Great Recession under this Democrat administration? How many? How about zero, nada, zip.

D or R, they are two sides of the same coin, working for the stinking rich.

Yes, keep drinking those kool aid and thinking that Democrat party is working hard for the working men/women while they laugh all the way to those big WS banks.
 
Last edited:

shira

Diamond Member
Jan 12, 2005
9,500
6
81
The Clintons are too rich for the poor and middle classes. So vote for a Republican candidate. Someone like, say, Donald Trump.

Oh, wait.
 

shira

Diamond Member
Jan 12, 2005
9,500
6
81
OK, let's try this again:

The Clintons are too rich for the poor and middle classes. So vote from a Republican candidate. Someone like, say, Ben Carson.

Oh, wait.

Dr. Ben Carson net worth: Dr. Ben Carson is an American neurosurgeon who has a net worth of $30 million dollars.
 

shira

Diamond Member
Jan 12, 2005
9,500
6
81
OK. One last time:

The Clintons are too rich for the poor and middle classes. So vote for a Republican candidate. Someone like, say, Carly Fiorina.

Oh, wait.

Republican presidential candidate Carly Fiorina and her husband have a net worth of $59 million, her campaign said late Wednesday, making her one of the wealthiest candidates in the race so far.
 

rudder

Lifer
Nov 9, 2000
19,441
86
91
The Clintons are too rich for the poor and middle classes. So vote for a Republican candidate. Someone like, say, Donald Trump.

Oh, wait.

I don't see Donald Trump crying about how he was struggling after leaving the White House and having to purchase another million dollar home. Trump is rich and does not hide it. Hillary uses the Clinton Foundation to trade political favors for $$$.
 

IGBT

Lifer
Jul 16, 2001
17,964
140
106
I don't see Donald Trump crying about how he was struggling after leaving the White House and having to purchase another million dollar home. Trump is rich and does not hide it. Hillary uses the Clinton Foundation to trade political favors for $$$.


the clinton crime foundation operates above and below the table. They must have took operations lessons from Berny Madoff.
 

1prophet

Diamond Member
Aug 17, 2005
5,313
534
126
How can any physician who isn't poor effectively treat the poor?

How can any attorney who isn't poor effectively represent the poor?

How can any philanthropist effectively give money to the poor?

It has nothing to do with being rich, It has to do with taking corporate money while pretending to be for the very middle class the corporate class is screwing over.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
73,916
6,569
126
It has nothing to do with being rich, It has to do with taking corporate money while pretending to be for the very middle class the corporate class is screwing over.

You should vote third party and help a Republican to win.
 

Svnla

Lifer
Nov 10, 2003
17,986
1,388
126
It has nothing to do with being rich, It has to do with taking corporate money while pretending to be for the very middle class the corporate class is screwing over.

This.

I do not see Trump, Carson, or Carly said they were "broke", bashed big businesses/hotels, medical firms/hospitals, IT/high tech companies while took in million and million from those bashed firms and pretend to work for the working class.
 

shira

Diamond Member
Jan 12, 2005
9,500
6
81
This.

I do not see Trump, Carson, or Carly said they were "broke", bashed big businesses/hotels, medical firms/hospitals, IT/high tech companies while took in million and million from those bashed firms and pretend to work for the working class.
Ooo, I get it: So if the choice is between (1) some person who got rich giving speeches to big corporations, who tells us she wants to raise taxes on the wealthy and increase the size of government in order to assist the poor and middle classes AND (2) some person who got rich running and investing in big corporations, who tells us she wants to reduce taxes on corporations and the wealthy and reduce government programs that assist the poor and middle classes, then of course anyone in the poor or middle class should vote for (2) because at least it's 100% clear they have no intention of doing anything for the poor and middle classes.
 

Svnla

Lifer
Nov 10, 2003
17,986
1,388
126
Ooo, I get it: So if the choice is between (1) some person who got rich giving speeches to big corporations, who tells us she wants to raise taxes on the wealthy and increase the size of government in order to assist the poor and middle classes AND (2) some person who got rich running and investing in big corporations, who tells us she wants to reduce taxes on corporations and the wealthy and reduce government programs that assist the poor and middle classes, then of course anyone in the poor or middle class should vote for (2) because at least it's 100% clear they have no intention of doing anything for the poor and middle classes.

How about Hillary stops being a BIG hypocrite to start? Again, how many fat cats of Wall Street are in jail from the Great Recession (that screwed the working class big time) under this Democrat administration? Yes, D party is working hard for the working men/women indeed. :biggrin:

As I said, stop drinking those kool aid and open your eyes. D or R, they are both sides of the same coin, working for the stinking rich, not for the working class but keep telling yourself otherwise.
 
Last edited: