• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Wikileaks releases hacked email with Clinton Paid Speech excerpts

Status
Not open for further replies.
plop said:
This all actually sounds good. Like, not in a "oh I'm just a Clinton fan whistling past the graveyard" kind of way. It all actually makes her sound smart and considerate and nuanced.

Thanks, Wikileaks!



Trump news? Which one?
Click to expand...

Small recap:

Trump caught on tape saying "grab them by the pussy" about women.
Trump caught on tape admitting he could sexually assault a woman because when you're a celebrity "you can do anything."
Trump's assault victim's claim is backed up by his own words.
Ashley Judd saying he made these kind of comments about someone married to his family member.
Also there's apparently a beauty pageant contestant that is now saying that Trump kissed her against her will.
 
j-wood said:
Maybe I'm reading it wrong, but why is everyone cool with Clinton having a public and private position on policies? I take that to mean public ally you say "single payer health care!" But privately you tell insurance companies not to worry.

Right?
Click to expand...

Well the leaked quotes explicitly use the "how the sausage is made" metaphor, and further expand on the reality that what sounds good in a 10 second soundbite probably doesn't reflect the nuance required in actually making policy
 
So basically she is a very sensible and experienced politician who believes in using evidence to make decisions.

Oh noes!
 
Bam Bam Baklava said:
Why the fuck would there be something incriminating in a delivered speech? Unless you mean that term figuratively.
Click to expand...

I think this is one of her "private speeches", which is why it is considered a "leak" from Wikileaks. Essentially, anything that comes from Wikileaks should certainly contain something damning, but it's fucking nothing.
 
Forearms said:
I think this is one of her "private speeches", which is why it is considered a "leak" from Wikileaks. Essentially, anything that comes from Wikileaks should certainly contain something damning, but it's fucking nothing.
Click to expand...

The goal of Wikileaks is now, very clearly, to take down the Democrats. If this is at the behest of Russia, I think that's debateable, but their goal is clear.
 
Forearms said:
I think this is one of her "private speeches", which is why it is considered a "leak" from Wikileaks. Essentially, anything that comes from Wikileaks should certainly contain something damning, but it's fucking nothing.
Click to expand...

We're talking about criminal. Who in their right mind would have a speech crafted and deliver it privately to a whole bunch of people announcing criminal behavior. That is nonsense.

These speeches were always a political issue.
 
JB1981 said:
Wow nothing incriminating at all. Actually she comes off pretty good and not remotely duplicitous
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure they just accidentally left out the part at the end where she says "Now give me all your moneyz so that I can use them to destroy all the pathetic weak poor people and nations who stand in our ways. I love bribes. Please bribe me. War war war".

Edit: She probably didn't write that part down in her transcripts actually. She says it so often, I'm sure she can just rattle it out from memory.
 
Bam Bam Baklava said:
We're talking about criminal. Who in their right mind would have a speech crafted and deliver it privately to a whole bunch of people announcing criminal behavior. That is nonsense.

These speeches were always a political issue.
Click to expand...

Sorry about that! I was loosely coupling "incriminating" with a potential "gotcha" on policy matters. In other words, ignore me :).
 
What is wrong with being pro trade? You can argue that current trade policies hurt certain groups of US workers, but why does that mean being "pro trade" is bad? If it was that simple, what's the simple alternative? Isolationism?
 
With all the investigations into Hillary, the hacking, and the release of information via freedom of information act, we pretty much have full disclosure at this point. Full disclosure beyond anything have seen on a presidential candidate. The fact that this is all there is, its funny. She is squeaky-clean for a politician. I can only imagine what skeletons are hiding in the cyber closet that is Trump's/RNC's email.
 
Suikoguy said:
The goal of Wikileaks is now, very clearly, to take down the Democrats. If this is at the behest of Russia, I think that's debateable, but their goal is clear.
Click to expand...

I wish we could get Snowden back. I'm tired of seeing headlines that read, Snowden-" Nanobots in our blood can be used to kill all US citizens"

And all he says in the article would be something about they could do that with the tech and other hypothetical stuff.

Snowden revealed the big stuff when he became a whistle blower and his host wants him to keep "leaking secrets"

Same for Wikileaks but they've been light on any leaks for a while.
 
Perhaps I'm too liberal, but this doesn't seem bad at all. So she's practical and doesn't believe that forcing her ideology on other people will get results? She wants to know the facts before deciding, rather than basing it on her feelings and beliefs? I guess there are some statements that can be taken out of context that'll sound bad, but on a whole it sounds like she's an experienced politician.
 
univariate said:
Yeah. That really stood out to me. Do people here really not care that HRC is pro Keystone? People here have been against that for a while.
Click to expand...

I don't think she's completely pro Keystone.. but most of Keystone is already in place and working.

I know we got to get out of petroleum based energy, but it's not ready for prime time. I get both sides of the issue.. and I think both sides overstate the financial impact and environmental impact.
 
This is all from an internal report where they went through all her speeches and picked the worst stuff, in case it leaked. If that's the case there is nothing here really. She's more pro-trade than she lets on, that's about it. In some ways she's *more* progressive here, she openly advocates for single payer Canadian-like system.
 
The part about Lincoln was actually pretty poignant.

Politics involves both vision and action. It's nice to believe in the righteous and good, but if you can't bring your opponents to the table, no matter how odious you think them, you'll never be able to make changes.
 
jon bones said:
it does put it in perspective. they probably have 5 or 6 "scandals" they're going to try to create. if the media coverage goes real bad for Trump, they drop one of these to try to counter.

it's a hilariously terrible strategy.
Click to expand...

Desperate times. If this was a thing, then you know they've got nothing.
 
Fits pretty cleanly with welfare liberalism though the laissez faire attitude and liberal institutionalist policies Im going to disagree with. She wont be able to pass any of her domestic policies most likely as the republicans will win state elections with 1) how they draw ridings and 2) how very little of her supporters i imagine will vote in those elections. I guess people could try and be optimistic but theres low chances of any implementation. Foreign affairs has me worried. Her record on foreign conflicts seems quite conflictive with her attitude on liberal institutionalism (like free trade) but the Iran deal which I guess some of which can be attributed to her might signal a change in direction?
 
univariate said:
Yeah. That really stood out to me. Do people here really not care that HRC is pro Keystone? People here have been against that for a while.
Click to expand...

Did you read the freaking quote? Nowhere does it say she is pro-Keystone. She literally just says "it's a contentious issue". That's it. And as pointed out before, Clinton is the SOS who delayed it in the first place.

You are literally just looking for something to complain about.
 
Don't see anything bad in this. What is supposed to be the problem? They are balanced answers to the subjects. Some you might disagree with a little, but nothing strange or damaging.
 
Reading that makes me think she might pick up some conservative votes actually.

Plus, I don't see anything in there about grabbing other people's crotches.
 
ClosingADoor said:
Don't see anything bad in this. What is supposed to be the problem? They are balanced answers to the subjects. Some you might disagree with a little, but nothing strange or damaging.
Click to expand...
Overall it's very small on the richter scale. However open trade, open borders line (which I totally agree with) might hurt her in today's anti-trade hysteria.
 
RustyNails said:
Overall it's very small on the richter scale. However open trade, open borders line (which I totally agree with) might hurt her in today's anti-trade hysteria.
Click to expand...
I guess. But I see that line as somewhere far in the future. She talks about all green energy and such there. Not a call to just open the borders for everyone now, which could bring a run of people to the US due to differences in quality of life and economy right now. But in the future where those differences are eliminated.

It's an easily defendable position for her.
 
I agree with all of it.

Though I am not quite sure what the fuck she was talking about when she was talking about the Keystone pipeline.

I think this is simply more prove that Clinton simply distrusts the media to an absurd degree and refuses to be more open even when people are telling her it would be helpful.

I remember hearing somewhere that George Stephonaoplous begged Clinton to release some document during the whitewater investigations that would exonerate them, but Clinton refused to do it.
 
It's a great indication of the nature of this election, in that people are so biased/passionate and that Trump is so fucked up as a candidate, that people are responding to this leak with

"It's nothing" and "Perfectly reasonable!"

Agreed that most of it is truly nothing
 
Socreges said:
It's a great indication of the nature of this election, in that people are so biased/passionate and that Trump is so fucked up as a candidate, that people are responding to this leak with

"It's nothing" and "Perfectly reasonable!"

Agreed that most of it is truly nothing
Click to expand...
LOL
 
Socreges said:
It's a great indication of the nature of this election, in that people are so biased/passionate and that Trump is so fucked up as a candidate, that people are responding to this leak with

"It's nothing" and "Perfectly reasonable!"

Agreed that most of it is truly nothing
Click to expand...
You agree that it is nothing, but people saying that are biases because of Trump? That doesn't make sense.
 
ClosingADoor said:
You agree that it is nothing, but people saying that are biases because of Trump? That doesn't make sense.
Click to expand...
You're right. It doesn't. Because that isn't what I said. Mostly nothing - there are several items. Her statement about "You Need Both A Public And A Private Position" is not nothing. It is transparent and not unexpected from a politician. To be generous, it's pragmatic. But it's cynical and undermines her campaign.

There are also two different ways to slice this. Is this nothing in that this won't impact the election (in a vacuum or vs Trump)? And is this nothing in how this impacts her as a desirable candidate (in a vacuum or vs Trump)?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Anyone get paid to playtest?
15
379
AJUMP23 replied
Chinese supercomputer hacked - 10 petabytes taken over months
30
449
ChuckeRearmed replied
Booking.com was hacked, users are already getting phishing messages
News 
5
169
AJUMP23 replied
What would you do if you got this email?
Opinion  2
72
130
Trogdor1123 replied
Kagurabachi Anime Releases April 2027
News 
5
164
thefool replied
Top Bottom