Hillary Clinton Defends High-Dollar Speaking Fees

[DC]

"Hillary has been giving campaign style speeches rather than the kinds of speeches one would expect from somebody who is largely retired from politics."

why would you expect her to give speeches as if she largely retired from Politics when you think she is the next Candidate?

 

[Tricky]

Within weeks after leaving office, Ronald Reagan was paid two million dollars to speak in Japan.

Conservative hypocrisy is so blatant.

 

[sunmaster14]

Within weeks after leaving office, Ronald Reagan was paid two million dollars to speak in Japan.

Conservative hypocrisy is so blatant.

I submit that you completely missed the point.

Great joke that Reagan told in his speech. Reagan always had the best jokes
about the Soviet Union.

 

[Tricky]

I submit that you completely missed the point.

I submit that you are completely wrong. Two people who are, at least temporarily, out of politics take large amounts of money for speaking. One is revered, one is reviled by the same people. Do you not see any hypocrisy there?

Great joke that Reagan told in his speech. Reagan always had the best jokes about the Soviet Union.

Oh, well that's very different. [/Latella]

 

[Spindrift]

Within weeks after leaving office, Ronald Reagan was paid two million dollars to speak in Japan.

Conservative hypocrisy is so blatant.

No, the whining is about someone who may run for president getting a lot of money for speaking engagements because, I don't know, it's not fair or something.

She holds no office unlike others who are willing to speak for money.
http://www.allamericanspeakers.com/booking-request.php?SpName=Ted-Cruz

 

[Francesca R]

Two people who are, at least temporarily, out of politics

I don't think Reagan's departure from politics is actually temporary.

 

[Tricky]

I don't think Reagan's departure from politics is actually temporary.

Yuk yuk. At the time, though, it wasn't a certainty. And he did, in fact, lend his support to other candidates.

 

[Cleon]

Honestly, no serious opponent of hers is going to make an issue of this, because chances are good that whoever she runs against (both in the primary and the general) is going to have some embarrassing speaking fees of their own.

 

[Tricky]

Honestly, no serious opponent of hers is going to make an issue of this, because chances are good that whoever she runs against (both in the primary and the general) is going to have some embarrassing speaking fees of their own.

Yes, when and if that happens, the candidates will all go strangely silent on the appropriateness of large speaking fees. This is just a little premature well-poisoning to make sure Hillary is never shown in a good light.

 

[sunmaster14]

Yes, when and if that happens, the candidates will all go strangely silent on the appropriateness of large speaking fees. This is just a little premature well-poisoning to make sure Hillary is never shown in a good light.

For the record, the question was raised by a largely supportive Diane Sawyer and ABC News, neither of which have a history of being partisan in favor of Republicans.

I didn't bring the issue up here to try to bring down Hillary Clinton. As I've stated many times, although I am a partisan, my goals here are not partisan. If I wanted to try to damage Hillary's reputation, JREF is about the last place I would want to spend my time doing it.

I just found the topic of using speaking fees to get around the intent of campaign finance law to be intellectually interesting. If you want to discuss Fox News hiring prospective Republican Presidential candidates as commentators as a way around campaign finance law, I consider that on point as well.

 

[johnny karate]

For the record, the question was raised by a largely supportive Diane Sawyer and ABC News, neither of which have a history of being partisan in favor of Republicans.

Which question was that?

This one?

...at what point does paying a politician an enormous fee to give a boring stump speech start to look like bribery?

Because I don't see where Diane Sawyer asked that question.

Perhaps you could offer a cite.

 

[sunmaster14]

Which question was that?

The question to which Tricky was implicitly referring. Which was about whether it was appropriate to earn such high speaking fees.

 

[Tricky]

For the record, the question was raised by a largely supportive Diane Sawyer and ABC News, neither of which have a history of being partisan in favor of Republicans.

And Sawyer raised the question in a fairly even-handed way. Not so with some others.

 

[sir drinks-a-lot]

Honestly, no serious opponent of hers is going to make an issue of this, because chances are good that whoever she runs against (both in the primary and the general) is going to have some embarrassing speaking fees of their own.

Damn, I'd love to have some embarrassing speaking fees!

 

[sir drinks-a-lot]

And Sawyer raised the question in a fairly even-handed way. Not so with some others.

Not sure what the point of that link was, but I think that sunmaster (or rather Diane Sawyer) raised an interesting question.

If one were an executive at a large corporation, especially in certain industries, and one thought Hillary was going to be potus, the 200K would probably be a good investment.

 

[Chaos]

Not sure what the point of that link was, but I think that sunmaster (or rather Diane Sawyer) raised an interesting question.

If one were an executive at a large corporation, especially in certain industries, and one thought Hillary was going to be potus, the 200K would probably be a good investment.

How so? I thought you guys insisted there´s no chance she´ll ever be President?

 

[DavidJames]

Not sure what the point of that link was, but I think that sunmaster (or rather Diane Sawyer) raised an interesting question.

That you could view that link and not understand the difference between it and Sawyer's comments shows how successful the Republican slime machine really is.

 

[timhau]

I don't think Reagan's departure from politics is actually temporary.

That's why he'd get a million dollars for speaking at the next Amaz!ng Meeting.

 

[Francesca R]

How so? I thought you guys insisted there´s no chance she´ll ever be President?

She's the betting favourite at 5/4

 

[Regnad Kcin]

For the record, the question was raised by a largely supportive Diane Sawyer and ABC News, neither of which have a history of being partisan in favor of Republicans.

Richard Nixon's Diane Sawyer? That one?