The head of a Clinton SuperPAC has offered to pay the fee.
If this footage really exists, it’s getting out one way or another. Leaking it tonight would really cap off the perfect weekend.
The lead story in the NY Times quotes Ted Cruz tweeting about The Apprentice tapes. (No link because I’m on a tablet.) The time it takes to go from Twitter rumor to mainstream news story is very short.
Just like manna.
Yeah, I read John’s post. John’s post is distinguished by its complete lack of actual quotations of what Hillary said that is so SCaaAAArrrRRRyyyy.
I can’t help but note that this your third post, Lakai, which is also entirely free of SCaaAAArrrRRRyyyy quotes from the latest Hillary info dump. And yet you’re the one trying to convince us that this info dump would lose Hillary “significant” support.
If you want to convince someone that there is anything damaging in Hillary’s speeches, you ought to be able to explain specifically what it is. You can’t even explain why John’s summation of Hillary’s remarks is supposed to anger her supporters.
Grownups know that people have private thoughts and you don’t just blurt everything out to everybody (I mean, I mostly do, but I’m upfront about disdain for being a grown up). Grownups are not going to be dismayed by the idea that the president has private meetings.
A hemisphere of open borders … you know, if Trump has said that, it would be because he was envisioning a world where the United States had conquered the whole continent. I don’t believe that Hillary’s supporters are scared that America is going to be overrun by hordes of Mexicans. In fact, I would bet that quite a lot of us still want to by the world a Coke.
But you know - without seeing Hillary’s actual words, it’s really impossible to hang any sort of actual argument on them. Until you bring actual quotes of actual words that Hillary said, you’re not going to convince anyone that Hillary is actually SCaaAAArrrRRRyyyy.
Republicans trying to distance themselves from Trump should be forced to watch this video.
Oh, the irony of it all.A few Republicans are distancing themselves from Trump now, but surely every single person with a public standing would have no option whatsoever but to disavow him if such a tape were released?
This is the crux.
Example: When Ronald Reagan was running for president in 1980, a friend and I disagreed about him on many issues. My friend was and is a conservative Republican; I was more liberal then than I am now.
One of those issues was whether Reagan would reinstate the draft. His saber-rattling talk about the Iranian hostage crisis and the Cold War made this seem more likely to me.
My friend assured me that wouldn’t happen. During the Vietnam War, there had been more support for general pro-war measures among conservatives than liberals. But my friend assured me that this had changed regarding the draft: conservatives now (in 1980) preferred the military to be an elite, professional force. This would be undermined by a draft.
After Reagan was elected, but before he took office, he announced that he was thinking about reinstating the draft. The first step of this was to reinstate mandatory registration, which was begun shortly thereafter (although an actual draft never followed).
I took this chain of events as proof that Reagan had lied about not favoring a draft, and that he had lied to people like me who opposed a draft, to get our votes. My friend didn’t have a problem with Reagan’s actions, and said that politicians should be allowed to change their positions.
Twelve years later, my friend and I were again in disagreement, over Bill Clinton. I had voted for Clinton, and one thing he’d promised was an income tax cut for the middle class. When he went back on that promise shortly after being elected, my friend and I found ourselves in a 180-degree reversal of 1980. I at the time was very concerned about the federal budget deficit, and thought that a tax cut was reckless. So I thought Clinton’s reversal was a good thing. I thus found myself in the same position my friend had been in after Reagan reinstated draft registration in 1980.
A hypothetical example: does anyone expect a president to tell the whole truth to our adversaries during international conflict? How we collect our intelligence? Our battle plans in war?
What we want in a politician is the ability and inclination to represent our interests. And this requires lying sometimes. I acknowledge that the definition of “our interests” can be complicated and fluid.
A half-hour into tonight’s debate.
“Anderson, nobody respects the blacks more than me, I can tell you that. And the blacks love me. Believe me. Believe me Anderson. Everybody says I have the best relationship with the blacks”
ZZZZZTTTT
“We interrupt tonight’s debate for a special breaking alert …”
Would someone explain to me why Bill Clinton’s sexual activity is related to Hillary’s campaign? Is Trump really digging this deep and finding nothing else to use? Seriously, what’s the relevance to Hillary’s campaign?
Specifically, a Mexican Coke made with real sugar!
The excerpts are apparently taken from a multitude of speeches that Clinton gave to various businesses and the actual text only seems to be available at wikileaks, though articles have quoted very small selections here and there.
This appears to be the public/private text:
[QUOTE=Alleged Hillary Clinton speech]
I mean, politics is like sausage being made. It is unsavory, and it always has been that way, but we usually end up where we need to be. But if everybody’s watching, you know, all of the back room discussions and the deals, you know, then people get a little nervous, to say the least. So, you need both a public and a private position.
[/QUOTE]
This appears to the open borders/open market text:
[QUOTE=Alleged Hillary Clinton speech]
My dream is a hemispheric common market, with open trade and open borders, some time in the future with energy that is as green and sustainable as we can get it, powering growth and opportunity for every person in the hemisphere.
[/QUOTE]
Bill’s affairs of course don’t have anything to do with Hillary’s campaign, and bringing them up would backfire by making her more sympathetic as the wronged wife. He could, however, criticize her for demeaning the women who were Bill’s accusers and claiming that she doesn’t respect women either. He has also implied, without evidence, that Hillary has been unfaithful to Bill. However, his own documented transgressions are so much worse than anything he could plausibly accuse her of that he would take more damage than he could inflict on her. “She’s just as bad as I am” isn’t going to be a believable argument.
I’ve always thought that increasing transparency in government would always be better. Then I heard about Chatham House Rules, and it got me to thinking about all those meetings I’ve been at where no one wants to really say what is on their mind. Which got me to thinking how it would be even worse among politicians, and *every *meeting would devolve into political posturing, compromise would become impossible and nothing would ever get done.
So now I think I’d agree a bit with the public/private thing.
Still, it is a pretty way of saying that you may not be “strictly honest” with your constituents, and it’s not a statement I’d want attributed to me just before an election, especially if I already suffered from trust issues.
There’s not going to be a 3rd debate.
And this is completely within the realm of possible. Can you believe this?
This has been the most remarkable election of modern times. We have a candidate that is completely unpredictable and unstable. He may show up tonight, he may not. If he has his ass handed to him tonight, I can completely see him not doing a third debate.
Just remarkable.
Yes, but he isn’t going to “lose” tonight’s debate. Flip over the game table? Sure. Scorched earth? Sure. “Lose?” No way.
So like Clint debating an empty chair, Hillary will show up and debate an empty suit?
Also, there’s the implication that, by sticking by Bill, Hillary has been an enabler / supporter of a sexual abuser.
Like the folks who haven’t rescinded their endorsements of Trump?