DescentBB

An Assange release this time, a little later than promised, giving us more Russian hacked Podesta emails concerning our favorite 2-faced Hillary. Ya know, I don't know who's worse this election. A lewd pervert wandering hands egomaniac with a thin skin and foul mouth to match, or a slimy career politician who promises us she's going to do one thing in public, while in private she does the exact opposite, usually favoring her wealthy supporters. Plus, she admits privately to being out of touch with the middle class. ★■◆●. Sorry Slick, Hillary is just too dirty. The debates are going to be even more interesting this Sunday.

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/polit ... lease.html

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politic ... -1.2822032

http://time.com/4523749/hillary-clinton ... n-podesta/

Hillary Clinton's paid closed-door speeches to Wall Street banks apparently included her dreams of "open trade and open borders" and a suggestion that bankers are best positioned to know how the industry should be regulated, according to hacked emails made public Friday by WikiLeaks.

I wonder if she would be so keen on open boarders if she knew most of the immigrants would vote republican?

And Bankers are best positioned? Does she forget who set up the 2008 collapse and who had to be bailed out?

tunnelcat wrote:An Assange release this time, a little later than promised, giving us more Russian hacked Podesta emails concerning our favorite 2-faced Hillary.

I know TC. What're we going to do as a country?

Read all three articles...was there something important to be gleaned from these? Spoke about open markets and other things, with lots of context missing??

*Multi-millionaire giving a speech to other multi-millionaires and says she's out of touch with the middle class. Stop the presses!!! Very, very few presidential candidates or high level politicians have ever known what it's like to be middle class. C'mon. Nothing new. I was thinking there was going to be something salacious in those articles....BOOOOOOOOOORING

I don't really see much to damage Clinton with this batch of emails. A campaign guy doing some red team analysis on her speeches? From what i've read of what she said, it really doesn't look that bad at all. It just kind of solidifies my perception of Clinton as a centrist public servant working from a position at the nexus of public and private power. She's not a radical leftist. Makes me wonder why she didn't just release transcripts and be done with it. That seems to be Clinton's biggest issue. She has a not unjustified distrust in how potentially unflattering information will be portrayed.

That's all probably a knee-jerk defense to make the ★■◆● sandwich I'm taking a big bite of more digestible.

At least her problems are not lurid tabloid stuff. But I agree that her problem is being far too secretive and dismissive of public concerns. It's far better to have everything out in the open instead of trying to hide things. When you hide things, other people tend to think you're up to something untoward or illegal. If she's not doing anything illegal or crooked, why hide it in the first place?

My problem with her is that she tells the public one thing, and does something else in office. She's too willing to play for pay. The TPP is one of those "things" she's probably soothed Sanders' supporters by telling them she's now against it, when in reality, she's still for it and would probably pass it once she's president. Why? Because she far more likely to support her wealthy supporter's demands than that of the common people. Money, money, money. Those emails do tell us that she's always been a big free trade supporter. Why would she change, unless it was to just get elected. After all, she is a seasoned politician.

I watched some of the Sunday bobbleheads this morning and saw a surrogate give the Clinton response to the leaks. Donna Brazile: "I don't open things postmarked from Russia." Good god.

I saw her too. She also said that she wasn't concerned about the contents of those emails that had excerpts from Hillary's secretive speeches to her rich donors. She should be concerned. That's kind of stuff that will sink a candidate. Talk about having a blind eye.

nothing in those emails, even Bernie's out saying as much. That is all Brazille needed to worry about.

Slick says so so it must be true

watch, and wait. This weeks polls and histograms might require that you sit down before reading them. I figure she'll be close to 380 electoral votes projected, and we've already seen overnights indicating that she's completely swung Florida, Ohio, Nevada and Arizona.

callmeslick wrote:That is all Brazille needed to worry about.

This is why many Democrats aren't enthused by Clinton. Brazile could've not shown up for the interview and viewers would've had the same understanding of the issue, except without having to sit through an obvious misdirection to avoid talking about the issue. I should be the easiest person to convince this is a nothingburger, I've already looked at the leak and determined it myself, and I came away from watching the interview going wtf are they hiding?

tunnelcat wrote:I saw her too. She also said that she wasn't concerned about the contents of those emails that had excerpts from Hillary's secretive speeches to her rich donors. She should be concerned. That's kind of stuff that will sink a candidate. Talk about having a blind eye.

Unless they're running against Trump.