Here Are Hillary Clinton's Three Speeches To Goldman Sachs For Which She Was Paid $675,000

Tyler Durden's picture

As has been widely reported, in 2013 Hillary Clinton was paid $675,000 for three speeches to Goldman Sachs.  One was delivered on June 4, 2013 at the 2013 IBD CEO Annual Conference at The Inn at Palmetto Bluff in South Carolina, a second one took place on October 24, 2013 at the Goldman Sachs Asset Management AIMS Alternative Investment Symposium, and the last one was delivered on October 29, 2013 at the Goldman Sachs builders and innovators summit.

The speech transcripts, in their entirety, were revealed for the first time in an email from Tony Carrk, research director at Hillary for America, in an email dated January 23, 2016, and disclosed to the public for the first time ever during today's latest Wikileak of Podesta emails.

In the email Carrk says:

The 3 (I misspoke about 5 earlier) speeches to Goldman are attached with
some parts highlighted. Below are some of the more noteworthy quotes.

The highlights Carrk refers to are the following:

In the first excerpt Hillary Clinton (rightfully) mocks Dodd Frank as nothing but a political contrivance which was created solely for political reasons as "there was also a need to do something because for political reasons." To wit: "*Clinton Said, With Dodd-Frank, There Was “A Need To Do Something Because For Political Reasons” Because Members Of Congress “Can't Sit Idly By And Do Nothing.”

“And with political people, again, I would say the same thing, you know, there was a lot of complaining about Dodd-Frank, but there was also a need to do something because for political reasons, if you were an elected member of Congress and people in your constituency were losing jobs and shutting businesses and everybody in the press is saying it's all the fault of Wall Street, you can't sit idly by and do nothing, but what you do is really important.” [GS2, 10/24/13]

* * *

In the second highlighted excerpt, Tim O'Neill, Global Co-Head of the Investment Management Division, thanks Hillary for her "continued involvement in the issues (inaudible) to be courageous in some respects to associated with Wall Street and this environment" and then thanks her "very much."

*Tim O’Neill Told Clinton “We Really Did Appreciate It” When She Had Been “Courageous In Some Respects To Associated With Wall Street And This Environment.”

“MR. O'NEILL: By the way, we really did appreciate when you were the senator from New York and your continued involvement in the issues (inaudible) to be courageous in some respects to associated with Wall Street and this environment. Thank you very much. SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I don't feel particularly courageous. I mean, if we're going to be an effective, efficient economy, we need to have all part of that engine running well, and that includes Wall Street and Main Street. And there's a big disconnect and a lot of confusion right now. So I'm not interested in, you know, turning the clock back or pointing fingers, but I am interested in trying to figure out how we come together to chart a better way forward and one that will restore confidence in, you know, small and medium-size businesses and consumers and begin to chip away at the unemployment rate. So it's something that I, you know, if you're a realist, you know that people have different roles to play in politics, economics, and this is an important role, but I do think that there has to be an understanding of how what happens here on Wall Street has such broad consequences not just for the domestic but the global economy, so more thought has to be given to the process and transactions and regulations so that we don't kill or maim what works, but we concentrate on the most effective way of moving forward with the brainpower and the financial power that exists here.” [GS2, 10/24/13]

* * *

In a third noted excerpt, Clinton pitches the idea that the best regulation of Wall Street is self-regulation because "the people that know the industry better than anybody are the people who work in the industry.”

*Speaking About Financial Regulations, Clinton Said “The People That Know The Industry Better Than Anybody Are The People Who Work In The Industry.”

“There's nothing magic about regulations, too much is bad, too little is bad. How do you get to the golden key, how do we figure out what works? And the people that know the industry better than anybody are the people who work in the industry.” [GS2, 10/24/13]

* * *

In a fourth excerpt, Hillary admits she had "great relations and worked so close together" with Wall Street and has "a lot of respect for the work you do and the people who do it."

*Clinton Said “I Represented All Of You For Eight Years. I Had Great Relations And Worked So Close Together After 9/11 To Rebuild Downtown.”

*“I represented all of you for eight years. I had great relations and worked so close together after 9/11 to rebuild downtown, and a lot of respect for the work you do and the people who do it, but I do -- I think that when we talk about the regulators and the politicians, the economic consequences of bad decisions back in '08, you know, were devastating, and they had repercussions throughout the world.” [GS2, 10/24/13]

The fifth and final highlighted excerpt blames banks' unwillingness to "do what they need to do" due to fear of regulations, the same regulations which in the same speech she said should be left to Wall Street.

*Clinton Said “Banks Are Not Doing What They Need To Do Because They're Scared Of Regulations, They're Scared Of The Other Shoe Dropping.

*“I mean, right now, there are so many places in our country where the banks are not doing what they need to do because they're scared of regulations, they're scared of the other shoe dropping, they're just plain scared, so credit is not flowing the way it needs to to restart economic growth. So people are, you know, a little -- they're still uncertain, and they're uncertain both because they don't know what might come next in terms of regulations, but they're also uncertain because of changes in a global economy that we're only beginning to take hold of.” [GS2, 10/24/13]

* * *

Addtionally, as flagged by Reuters earlier, in the June 4 Goldman Sachs speech, Hillary warned Beijing it would "ring China with missile defense" unless it did more to rein in North Korea's missile program.

Because they could not only do damage to our treaty allies, namely Japan and South Korea, but they could actually reach Hawaii and the west coast theoretically, and we're going to ring China with missile defense. We're going to put more of our fleet in the area.

Clinton told Goldman that the message to China had been, "You either control them, or we're going to have to defend against them."  According to Reuters, the State Department on Friday declined to comment on "alleged leaked documents." When asked whether such a message had been delivered to China, an official said it was not department policy to comment publicly on diplomatic discussions. Although Clinton's reported comments raised a stir in Asia, Reuters adds.

Clinton said she also told her Chinese counterparts that the United States had as much a claim to the Pacific as China, given that U.S. forces had liberated it in World War Two.

China had "a right to assert themselves," but the United States needed to "push back to create a balance" to prevent China taking a chokehold on sea lanes and countries bordering the South China Sea, she said.

* * *

Clinton gives yet another confirmation that Saudi Arabia and the Emirates are funding the "Jihadis" in Syria, aka the Islamic State:

If you look at what's happening in Syria, it's clearly a multiply leveled proxy battle. We've got Iran with their agents in Hezbollah, and they're being taken on by indigenous rebels but increasingly a collection of Jihadists who are funded by the Saudis, funded by the Emiratis, funded by Qatar, and you have the Turks that were very active in the beginning, but then began to be concerned by some of the development inside Syria, particularly among the northern and northeastern Kurdish population in Syria.

Here are some interesting thoughts on Syria from June 2013, in which she herself admitted that a no fly zone in Syria would "kill a lot of Syrians."

So let's just take a step back and look at the situation that we currently have in Syria. When -- before the uprising started in Syria it was clear that you had a minority government running with the Alawites in lead with mostly the other minority groups -- Christians, the Druze, some significant Sunni business leaders. But it was clearly a minority that sat on top of a majority. And the uprisings when they began were fairly mild in terms of what they were asking for, and Assad very well could have in my view bought them off with some cosmetic changes that would not have resulted in what we have seen over the now two years and the hundred thousand deaths and the destabilization that is going on in Lebanon, in Jordan, even in Turkey, and the threat throwing to Israel and the kind of pitched battle in Iran well supported by Russia, Saudi, Jordanians and others trying to equip the majority Sunni fighters.

 

I think that we have tried very hard over the last two years to use the diplomatic tools that were available to us and to try to convince, first of all, the Russians that they were helping to create a situation that could not help but become more chaotic, because the longer Assad was able to hold out and then to move offensively against the rebels, the more likely it was that the rebels would turn into what Assad has called them, terrorists, and well equipped and bringing in Al-Qaeda and its affiliates.

 

The Russian's view of this is very different. I mean, who conceives Syria as the same way he sees Chechnya? You know, you have to support toughness and absolute merciless reactions in order to drive the opposition down to be strangled, and you can't give an inch to them and you have to be willing to do what Assad basically has been willing to do.

 

That has been their position. It pretty much remains their position, and it is a position that has led to the restocking of sophisticated weapon systems all through this. The Russians' view is that if we provide enough weapons to Assad and if Assad is able to maintain control over most of the country, including the coastal areas where our naval base is, that's fine with us. Because you will have internal fighting still with the Kurds and with the Sunnis on the spectrum of extremism. But if we can keep our base and we can keep Assad in the titular position of running the country, that reflects well on us because we will demonstrate that we are back in the Middle East. Maybe in a ruthless way, but a way that from their perspective, the Russian perspective, Arabs will understand.

 

So the problem for the US and the Europeans has been from the very beginning: What is it you -- who is it you are going to try to arm? And you probably read in the papers my view was we should try to find some of the groups that were there that we thought we could build relationships with and develop some covert connections that might then at least give us some insight into what is going on inside Syria.

 

But the other side of the argument was a very -- it was a very good one, which is we don't know what will happen. We can't see down the road. We just need to stay out of it. The problem now is that you've got Iran in heavily. You've got probably at least 50,000 fighters inside working to support, protect and sustain Assad. And like any war, at least the wars that I have followed, the hard guys who are the best fighters move to the forefront.

 

* * *

 

So we now have what everybody warned we would have, and I am very concerned about the spillover effects. And there is still an argument that goes on inside the administration and inside our friends  at NATO and the Europeans. How do intervene -- my view was you intervene as covertly as is possible for Americans to intervene. We used to be much better at this than we are now. Now, you know,  everybody can't help themselves. They have to go out and tell their friendly reporters and somebody else: Look what we're doing and I want credit for it, and all the rest of it.

 

So we're not as good as we used to be, but we still -- we can still deliver, and we should have in my view been trying to do that so we would have better insight. But the idea that we would have like a no fly zone -- Syria, of course, did have when it started the fourth biggest Army in the world. It had very sophisticated air defense systems. They're getting more sophisticated thanks to Russian imports.

 

To have a no fly zone you have to take out all of the air defense, many of which are located in populated areas. So our missiles, even if they are standoff missiles so we're not putting our pilots at risk -- you're going to kill a lot of Syrians. So all of a sudden this intervention that people talk about so glibly becomes an American and NATO involvement where you take a lot of civilians.

Some thoughts on Putin:

Look, I would love it if we could continue to build a more positive relationship with Russia. I worked very hard on that when I was Secretary, and we made some progress with Medvedev, who was president inname but was obviously beholden to Putin, but Putin kind of let him go and we helped them get into the WTO for several years, and they were helpful to us in shipping equipment, even lethal equipment, in and out of out of Afghanistan.

 

So we were making progress, and I think Putin has a different view. Certainly he's asserted himself in a way now that is going to take some management on our side, but obviously we would very much like to have a positive relationship with Russia and we would like to see Putin be less defensive toward a relationship with the United States so that we could work together on some issues.

 

We've tried very hard to work with Putin on shared issues like missile defense. They have rejected that out of hand. So I think it's what diplomacy is about. You just keep going back and keep trying. And the President will see Putin during the G20 in Saint Petersburg, and we'll see what progress we can make.

Here is Hillary opining on Wikileaks and Edward Snowden:

MR. BLANKFEIN: I'll discuss that after I leave here. Let me ask you another question because this is also a topical question. Let's say, hypothetically, that one country was eavesdropping on another country.

(Laughter.)

MR. BLANKFEIN: And I didn't hear the crisp denials, but I didn't hear any confirmation of it. How would you -- would you be looking forward to giving that explanation? How do you go -- what do you do now?

SECRETARY CLINTON: So, all right. This is all off the record, right? You're not telling your spouses if they're not here.

MR. BLANKFEIN: Right.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Okay. I was Secretary of State when WikiLeaks happened. You remember that whole debacle. So out come hundreds of thousands of documents. And I have to go on an apology tour. And I had a jacket made like a rock star tour. The Clinton Apology Tour. I had to go and apologize to anybody who was in any way characterized in any of the cables in any way that might be considered less than flattering. And it was painful. Leaders who shall remain nameless, who were characterized as vain, egotistical, power hungry --

MR. BLANKFEIN: Proved it.

SECRETARY CLINTON: -- corrupt. And we knew they were. This was not fiction. And I had to go and say, you know, our ambassadors, they get carried away, they want to all be literary people. They go off on tangents. What can I say. I had grown men cry. I mean, literally. I am a friend of America, and you say these things about me.

MR. BLANKFEIN: That's an Italian accent.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Have a sense of humor.

MR. BLANKFEIN: And so you said, Silvio.
(Laughter.)

SECRETARY CLINTON: So, fast forward. Here we are. You know, look, I have said, and I will continue to say, we do need to have a conversation with and take a hard look at the right balance that we could strike between, you know, privacy and security because there's no doubt, and I've seen this and understand it, there's no doubt that much of what we've done since 9/11 has kept us safer. That's just a fact. It's also kept our friends and our partners and our allies safer, as well. The sharing of intelligence requires the gathering of intelligence and the analysis of intelligence.

* * *

MR. BLANKFEIN: Maybe embedded you've already given part the answer, but how serious, how bad was it what Snowden and Assange did? What are the -- I mean, Assange -- if this were a destroyer and innovator conference, we might have had Assange here.

SECRETARY CLINTON: I wouldn't be here.

MR. BLANKFEIN: But how much did that hurt us? Aside from the embarrassment, clearly some avenues now, some things we relied on that, have been closed off for us. I know it was very important to try to get some legislation that would have made it legal to get some more of this metadata that's been very helpful without having the carriers face liability. That's probably been put on the back burner. What are the consequences long term for this in terms of our own safety and the safety of the Republic.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, separate the two. The WikiLeaks problem put at risk certain individuals. We had to -- we had to form a kind of investigative team that looked at all the names and all the documents, which was quite a challenge, to make sure that identities that were either revealed or described in enough detail that they could be determined would not put people who were at risk. I mean, without going into detail, you know, maybe they're -- let's just hypothetically say there was somebody serving in a military in a certain country who was worried about some of the activities of the military that he served because he thought they were doing business with rogue states or terrorist networks, and so he would seek out an American diplomat to begin a conversation. And the American diplomat would report back about the concerns that were being expressed about what was happening in this country. And then it's -- you know, it's exposed to the world. So we had to identify, and we moved a number of people to safe -- to safety out of where they were in order for them to be not vulnerable.

So on the WikiLeaks, there was the embarrassment factor, there were the potential vulnerability factors that individuals faced. The WikiLeaks issue was, you know, unfortunate. Private Manning should have never had access to a lot of what he did have access to. So, in effect, it was a problem. But it didn't expose the guts of how we collect and analyze data.

* * *

So, you know, if Snowden has given them a blueprint to how we operate, why is that in any way a positive. We should have the debate. We should have the conversation. We should make the changes
where they're necessary. But we shouldn't put our systems and our people at risk. So I think that WikiLeaks was a big bump in the road, but I think the Snowden material could be potentially much more threatening to us.

* * *

We are currently readying the transcripts for further informative details about what Hillary tells the world's most improtant commercial bank in private.

Here are the full speeches with links:

Speech #1 (link)

 

* * *

Speech #2 (link)

 

* * *

Speech #3 (link)

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
adamas's picture

I fear the Jewish banks with their craftiness and tortuous tricks will entirely control the exuberant riches of America. And use it to systematically corrupt modern civilization. The Jews will not hesitate to plunge the whole of Christendom into wars and chaos that the earth should become their inheritance." (Bismarck)

 

We should have listened not to zio propaganda, but to German statesmen 

38BWD22's picture

 

 

Oh, excellent!  Maybe many, many more will now see the light.*

 

* Naah, they won't.

 

Stll, great work Tylers.

CheapBastard's picture

Diversity if our Strength! ~ Hitlery Clinton

 

3 dead, dozen wounded in shooting at Los Angeles party

 

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/3-dead-dozen-wounded-in-shooting-at-los...

Looney's picture

Just a few inches Off Topic…

A couple of days ago on CSPN, a bunch of cyber-experts from both the private sector and the government were discussing, amongst other issues, the recent Wikileaks-related hacks.

ALL OF THEM said that there’s absolutely no way to prove that the hacks were perpetrated by, or originated from, Russia.

The only “proof” a .gov “expert” offered was the “possible TIME FRAME of the hacks” which could’ve happened between 9 am and 5 pm Moscow time.

Seriously?  No, really, SERIOUSLY???

1. This time frame corresponds to the “5 pm – 1 am EST” in the US, meaning that any US citizen (or an illegal alien) on the East Coast could’ve come home from work, ordered some pizza, had a beer or two, and started hacking away until 1am. How improbable is that?

2. The same scenario applies to the Central Time Zone – anyone in Chicago, Dallas, or Dodge City could’ve done it between 4pm and midnight local time. Is that improbable?

3. Even on the West Coast, it would’ve been 2 pm – 10 pm local time. How improbable is THAT?

4. Holy Fuck!!! Is that all our Ministry of Truth could come up with - the time-fucking-frame???

Looney </scream off></giggle on>   ;-)

Deathrips's picture

"Wars are the Jews harvest,

for with them we wipe out the Christians and get control of their gold.

We have already killed 100 million of them, and the end is not yet."

(Chief Rabbi in France, in 1859, Rabbi Reichorn.)

svayambhu108's picture

Did US become a nation of killer clowns?

Theosebes Goodfellow's picture

It's people like Barry Soeotoro/Barack Hussein Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton that are giving killer clowns a bad name. Talk about making them look like rank amateurs...

JRobby's picture

"I will completely deregulate banking, no investigations or prosecutions, open all borders to ensure and enless supply of cheap labor, Raise taxes on individuals so GOVT debt can be issued endlessly and finally, bulldoze all of those pesky middle class people that keep complaining into an open pit and hose them down with acid."

Thanks for the money!!!!!

eatthebanksters's picture

Hillary likes self regulation for rackateering operations....especially the Clinto Foundation.

jeff montanye's picture

hillary clinton has already said that she was sorry she used a personal server that was not secured for her emails.

i can't believe i'm saying this, but i don't believe she's lying.

anymore.

 

CuttingEdge's picture

Here's a conversation you may have with an unliberated voter:

Psst?

You think Trump's an asshole mysogonist, right?

Sure thing man - the things those womens said he done!!!

Okay. So. You hear the one about the President exposing himself to a bunch of stewardesses?

Nah! Get the fuck outahere!!! When?

FOUR FUCKING DAYS AGO on the 11th.

 

 

As NOT reported in the MSM. That about sum the situation up in the real world, guys?

I guess what Trump is "alleged" to have done is far worse than that shit in the eyes of the MSM. Not.

The morally bankrupt cunts are betraying the public and coining it from them at the same time.

 

I probably won't be around to see it but after the politicians and the bankers, will there be any lamposts left for the moguls and editorial staff of all MSM syndicates?

Pretty please - with a cherry on top?

Pinch's picture

This is sooooo boring. Let's just all agree that Trump has slumped and Clinton has won the election, and move on.

Sorry, conspiracy nutters of ZH, you lose. Again.

Loftie's picture
Loftie (not verified) Pinch Oct 15, 2016 8:02 PM

"I fear the Jewish banks with their craftiness and tortuous tricks will entirely control the exuberant riches of America."

They ALREADY do.

https://goo.gl/bFYusM

willwork4food's picture

$675k for a few speeches. It's a great gig if you can get it. They haven't called me yet.

nope-1004's picture

MiniMee and the habitual lying grandma are the same height?  lol

 

philipat's picture

Hey Loftie, previously known as mofio then santafe then Aristotle of Greece then Gargoyle then bleu then oops then lance-a-lot and others. Lance-a-lot got banned very quickly so time to re-use another old persona (non grata)?

You are a serial spammer and a serial pain in the ass. Might I politely suggest that you go fuck yourself? And get a life.

PS. You might have noticed that my attempt to expose you for what you are is always the same. That’s because your Spam is always the same (Using fake links to your BS site which has no connection to your comments, which are deliberately dramatic to encourage people to click on the fake link) so it seems only fair that my exposure of your crap should also always be the same. An eye for an eye.

TruthHunter's picture

Is that you?  Million Dollar Boner? 

401K of Dooom's picture

Original link to article

 

Hey idiot!  Go back to your masters and get another job!  We are on to you!

The Stream

Make The Stream my Homepage
Astroturf ‘Outrage Machine’ of Paid Trolls Floods Social Media to Counteract Negative News About Hillary Clinton
One supporter being paid to create multiple anonymous accounts does not constitute genuine support for Hillary Clinton.

By Rachel Alexander Published on October 9, 2016 •

A significant portion of online support for Hillary Clinton is manufactured by paid “astroturf” trolls: a large team of supporters who spend long hours responding to negative news on the internet about her. The Clinton SuperPAC Correct the Record, which is affiliated with her campaign, acknowledged in an April press release that it was spending $1 million on project “Breaking Barriers” to pay people to respond to negative information about Clinton on social media sites like Facebook, Reddit, Instagram and Twitter. That amount has since increased to over $6 million. The trolls create a false impression that Clinton has more support than she really does, because one supporter will frequently create multiple anonymous accounts.

Libby Watson of The Sunlight Foundation observed that the astroturf effort goes far beyond merely defending Clinton, to targeting and intimidating those who criticize her. She told The Daily Beast, “This seems to be going after essentially random individuals online.”

Brian Donahue, chief executive of the consulting firm Craft Media/Digital, explained the troll operation to The Los Angeles Times, “It is meant to appear to be coming organically from people and their social media networks in a groundswell of activism, when in fact it is highly paid and highly tactical.” He went on, “That is what the Clinton campaign has always been about. It runs the risk of being exactly what their opponents accuse them of being: a campaign that appears to be populist but is a smokescreen that is paid and brought to you by lifetime political operatives and high-level consultants.”
Hillary’s Anonymous Trolls First Targeted Bernie Sanders
Hillary Clinton astroturf image

One of the images paid Hillary supporters are instructed to use in their social media posts. (correctrecord.org)

The Daily Kos, which preferred Bernie Sanders over Clinton, observed some of these tactics during the Democratic primary. One author wrote, “[T]here have been a number of diaries claiming to ‘have switched from Bernie to Hillary’ lately, and some of them have been from recently created accounts with no record of pro-Sanders remarks or diaries.” The author further called the Clinton effort out, writing, “We are on to your presumptive corporate shilling.”

The moderators of the Sanders subreddit /r/SandersForPresident wrote that the “Bernie Bro” concept was created by fake accounts in order to “establish a narrative that Bernie’s supporters are all racist, sexist young males who harass people online.” David Fredrick, co-founder and moderator of the subreddit, told The Atlantic when Sanders was still in the race, “If anyone criticizes a Sanders supporter online now there’s doubt over whether it’s a genuine exchange or if it’s something that Correct the Record is behind.”

David Brock, a former right-wing activist who now works for Clinton and started the left-wing site Media Matters which ruthlessly targets conservatives, is credited with creating the online trolling project. After the actor Tim Robbins, a Sanders supporter, received a barrage of tweets attacking him for speculating about election fraud hurting Sanders, Robbins responded to 88  different accounts with this tweet, “Dear @CorrectRecord operatives, Thank you for following today’s talking points. Your check is in the mail. Signed, @davidbrockdc.”
Clinton Staffer Adam Parkhomenko Outed as Troll on Reddit

Five months ago, the Trump subreddit /r/The_Donald warned, “We are being brigaded by Clinton super PAC shills. Quick, post pics upsetting to Hillary.” Users posted messages like this, “I saw like 4 today, new account and 40 pro hillary comments. Said she was a mom in one post and an asian student in another. Deleted account after someone called her out.”

Savvy Reddit users outed one of the Clinton staffers, Adam Parkhomenko, her director of grassroots engagement, who was apparently posting anonymously on the site threatening Trump supporters. Under the username rcMI9HXF, he wrote, “Warning- participation in this slanderous witch hunt will result in legal action.  Mrs. Clinton has been made aware of your childish attempt to slander her and her supporters.  There will be consequences for your actions.” When Reddit users guessed he was being paid by Clinton, he responded, “I am just an average Joe fed up with the blatant lies you people are slinging towards HRC. I’m a Bush supporter and volunteer, actually.” But when they discovered his home address, he finally admitted his real identity, “You can call me Adam. My buddies call me A.park.”
Clinton Staffer Luke Montgomery Behind Trump Attack Site Made to Look Like it Came From Bernie Sanders

When the “Deport Racism” website popped up, showing Hispanic children using profanity in reference to Trump and beating a pinata image of him, it appeared to come from the Sanders campaign. There was a link from the site to Sanders’ campaign site, implying that Sanders was the preferable candidate on immigration. But buried in the source code were links that appeared to be left over from another site called “Bill for First Lady 2016,” which was created by Clinton staffer Luke Montgomery. Outed, Montgomery removed the link to Sanders’ website. Montgomery, who came to prominence for his AIDs activism in the 1990s going by the name “Luke Sissyfag,” also deceptively registered a PAC called Feel the Bern.
The Clinton Machine Has Used Anonymous Trolls at Least as Far Back as 2007

The anonymous fake accounts come are nothing new for Clinton. In 2007, paid campaign staffers and volunteers on her campaign were caught creating anonymous accounts to artificially inflate her support. The influential Blue Hampshire blog discovered the ruse, when several anonymous accounts were all created in succession on the site from the same Clinton campaign IP address, which then bolstered pro-Clinton diaries.

Clinton hired a campaign manager this election cycle known for his scorched earth tactics. Robby Mook started a listserv in 2009 known as “Mook’s Mafia” to share political information with associates. He says things like “smite Republicans mafia-style” and “F U Republicans. Mafia till I die.” He has also said, “First, the mafia never separates, it just continues to grow and expand and move into other states in order to destroy Republicans.” By choosing Mook, Clinton reveals the type of campaign she wants, Alinskyite tactics of do anything to win.

Perhaps all this fake trolling won’t prove to be worth it. Once outed, the trolls will have a record to follow them around on the internet forever. One of Parkhomenko’s close friends told The Washington Post that he’s been “underutilized” on the campaign and is “miserable.” At some point, making up fake identities has to become demoralizing to all but the most hardened of campaign operatives.
Print Friendly
Comments ()
I

The national daily championing freedom, smaller government and human dignity. The Stream offers a rich and lively source for breaking news, Christian inspiration and conservative commentary while challenging the worst in the mainstream media.
Connect with Us

Withdrawn Sanction's picture

"This is sooooo boring."

And yet you feel obliged to contribute to the monotony.  Thanks for the insight into your character.  

DullKnife's picture

In corrupt 3rd World countries, this is called taking bribes.

A mark of corrupt public officials and illegal in non-corrupt countries.

Here, taking bribes is called "income".

But people in other countries, looking at the USA, see Clinton as a corrupt public official taking bribes.

Illegal behavior were it to be called "bribes".

Or if done by ordinary Americans.

 

True Blue's picture

She's sorry she got caught; nothing more.

And right there is also an open admission of guilt -which is all a 'reasonable prosecutor' would need to start proceedings. At this point every branch of the gov't is so corrupt that she could actually say "I am sorry I had Vince Foster murdered." and walk away.

Loftie's picture

Oh boy!

PrayingMantis's picture

 

 

T he

Right

Underdog  for

'Merican

Presidency

 

Trump is right ...  the video below proves (and Hiliary admitted in her own words) that Hiliary's gang of globalist criminals created the Mujahadeen that turned into > Al-Qaeda, and subsequently morphed into > Isis terrorists ... (15th second of the video) ...

 

... "... Must Watch!! Hillary Clinton tried to ban this video   ..." >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0agBtEEYTaY&feature=youtu.be#t=52.9026029 

CuttingEdge's picture

"This intervention that people talk about so glibly becomes an American and NATO involvement where you take a lot of civilians"

Err.

Hillary?

What part of "taking a lot of civilians" isn't talking yourself glibly about mass murder?

Completely sociopathic if the above statement is any indicator.

You are one evil bitch.

Hope you burn.

Regards - Edge

PS: Hope you, and the vermin* working for you, enjoyed this latest bucket of shit being dropped on your head.

 

*If the average ZHer think its great fun diving into every new release looking for that nugget, just spare a thought for Hillary's insidious minions desperately trying to find which direction the next shitstorm is coming from every time Assange takes a dump on all of them. Please? The thought I had in mind was "You look like right cunts now, dont you?"

 

CuttingEdge's picture

Looney?

They didn't mention Red Bull being involved? With vodka?

As in evil Russkie hackers fueled by RBVs into the early hours?

Just to add a bit "truthiness" window dressing to the allegations?

runswithscissors's picture

Can someone just kill the fucking evil warmongering neocon bitch hitlery clinton already?

...she won't die on her own...and she will start a war with China or Russia if she continues to breathe.

JRobby's picture

Wise to post as a question to unknown parties. Keeps black SUVs off your lawn............For now.

Backin2006's picture

BLANKFEIN: The voters have to realize that the only stable, sustainable government is one in which the moderates compromise and the fringes get rejected, not the other way around.
CLINTON: That is exactly.

CLINTON. And you're right, we've gone through these periods before. We have always had this kind of streak of whether it's know-nothingism or isolationism or, you know, anti-Communism, extremism.

CLINTON. I want to get back to having a two-party system that can have an adult conversation and a real debate about the future.
BLANKFEIN: Yeah, and one thing, I'm glad -- I'm proud that the financial services industry has been the one unifying theme that binds everybody together in common.

CLINTON. I would like to see more successful business people run for office. I really would like to see that because I do think, you know, you don't have to have 30 billion, but you have a certain level of freedom. And there's that memorable phrase from a former member of the Senate: You can be maybe rented but never bought. And I think it's important to have people with those experiences.

CLINTON. But, you know, part of the problem with the political situation, too, is that there is such a bias against people who have led successful and/or complicated lives. You know, the divestment of assets, the stripping of all kinds of positions, the sale of stocks. It just becomes very onerous and unnecessary. (Surely, she's not referring to Trump...)

BLANKFEIN: Madam Secretary, thank you very much for coming here this evening. And I just want to echo the comments that a couple of people have made. Just thank you so much for your service. America is so lucky to have had you, to have you, and to continue to have you as a servant for us. (Who's this 'us', banker?)

Uzda Farce's picture
Uzda Farce (not verified) Backin2006 Oct 15, 2016 4:22 PM

Lloyd Blankfein and Bill Clinton are members of the Rockefeller/CFR. Also Jacob Lew, Janet Yellen, Robert Rubin, Jamie Dimon, Laurence Fink, Lynn Forester de Rothschild and George Soros. Goldman, Citi, JPMorgan, BofA, and Wells Fargo are CFR corporate sponsors. See member lists at cfr dot org.

filmmaker's picture
filmmaker (not verified) Uzda Farce Oct 15, 2016 5:19 PM

My last pay check was $9500 working 12 hours a week online. My sisters friend has been averaging 15k for months now and she works about 20 hours a week. I can't believe how easy it was once I tried it out. This is what I do... http://tiny.cc/edszfy

duo's picture

The Donald doesn't need this shit.  Hillary has only one quest:  power.  Power over the deplorables, the ordinary Americans she hates, Catholics, needy Latinos, those on welfare.  She doesn't want to make anyone's life better, unless they've written the CGI a 7 figure check.

We've had multiple examples of what happens when such a person rises to power in the last century.  I ALWAYS ends up with millions dead.

For those who thought the Obama was the anti-Christ, he was just the warm-up band.

Withdrawn Sanction's picture

Hitlery's quest for power is like that of a dog chasing a car.  What's she going to do w/it once she has it?  

She's actually a pathetic figure (and if she were a normal person, I'd even feel some empathy for her).  She craves the validation she thinks money and power gives.  At the moment she achieves it (if she does), it will turn to ashes in her mouth.  

DeadFred's picture

LOL, he quote Snopes. One shill for another.

Theosebes Goodfellow's picture

~"...And the people that know the industry better than anybody are the people who work in the industry."~

Because, as we know, self-regulating bankers never commit any crimes, defraud any customers not cheat any governments. Hillary for Jail 2016

38BWD22's picture

 

 

Nice.  Let 'er rip, T.G.

John_Coltrane's picture

Most recently Wells Fargo created fake accounts for people to boost their sales numbers and bonus.  They regretted it...after they were caught.  That's the only time they regret it.

MrPalladium's picture

Hillary is giving wall street military intelligence and strategy briefings, which of course wall street wants so that they can understand and manage international and foreign policy risk in their product lines and portfolios. However, these briefings are going to leak all over the world, meaning that Russia, China, Iran, etc. are going to know exactly what the U.S. is planning and how it will react to likely events. Hillary is leaking state secrets all over the planet through these "private" speeches to oligarchs without security clearance and with no obligation to refrain from broadcasting what they know to the whole world.

JRobby's picture

There is no excuse or explanation for TREASON.

There is a death penalty option for a reason. 

nailgunner44's picture

The best way to unite all the nations on this globe would be an attack from some other planet. In the face of such an alien enemy, people would respond with a sense of their unity of interest and purpose.

Pumpkin's picture

Seriously?  No, really, SERIOUSLY???

 

Their god is Satan.  They lie, steal and murder.  It's what they do.

Chris Dakota's picture
Chris Dakota (not verified) Looney Oct 15, 2016 9:39 PM

HOLY SHIT!

Matt Drudge: On the sex stuff Hillary is about to get hers.

https://twitter.com/DRUDGE

The Donald has a new accuser too!

http://a.disquscdn.com/get?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.sli.mg%2F5CWGJn.jpg&key=q...

Rik Haines's picture

Agreed. Anyone who knows anything about networking, downloading, or online gaming would know how easy it is to spoof an IP address. Or they just could be making it all up. 

Which way to the beach's picture

This is more than a few inches off topic, but I just found out that Yoko Ono had an affair with HRC. It is going to take years of therapy to get that image out of my mind.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwMCUxhq9u0

A match made in heaven? I wonder what John Lennon would have thought of that. A long way from "All we are saying is give peace a chance".

Bubbles

anti-republocrat's picture

Whoever did it probably didn't even have to go home.  They just stayed a little late at their NSA office.

 

That brings to mind the exchange I recently saw between Chris Hayes and Glenn Greenwald.  Hayes keeps asking Greenwald if Podesta doesn't have a right to privacy.  Greenwald gets all tangled up with a "tradeoff" between a legitimate right to privacy and the public's need to know what those in power are plotting behind closed doors.  I'm thinking, what right to privacy?  Clinton voted for the PATRIOT Act and knew all about the NSA data collection Snowden revealed even before he revealed it.  The elites gave up everybody's rights to privacy, so it's a bit rich that anybody should think of that at this point.

Manthong's picture

 675 K…???

That ain’t nothing

Hey, old jewish would  pay at least $ 900 K for an ugly old whore like Hillary.

But I would not do her even with Blankfeend’s stick.

Fiscal.Enema's picture

I have done without the 3 Desert religions, (christianity, judaism and islam) in my life. All 3 Monotheistic "causes" have did nothing but leave a trail of blood where ever they go. War is coming soon.

chindit13's picture

Have you ever been in the deserts of the Middle East?  There's not much to do except invent religion.  Okay, maybe plot a raid against the nearby tribe, or---for some---get lucky with a camel.  Do you know why they call a camel the 'ship of the desert'?  The answer is too rude, but think homonym.  So many stars.  You cannot believe how many stars are out there until you've been in the Nafouz at night.  I never understood how monotheism came from that.  So many damn stars, one would think you'd need a committee of gods to take care of it all.  Roman gods, too, one for war and one for beauty and one for just about anything.  ZH's own honestann, the astrophysicist and all-around Renaissance woman (she pilots a Pipistrel Virus, IIRC, which isn't rated for aerobatics, but can handle them), could no doubt regale us with stories about each and every one of those stars and galaxies, though I don't think she needs the gods.  I can find the Pleiades Cluster, but need help to spot anything else outside our Milky Way.

Oooh, am I off topic here?  Just having some fun, because this election cycle is driving me batty. (Actually I'm trying to parrot the writing style of the guy who was behind http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-15/its-time-reset-i-used-be-patrio..., because I can make next to no sense of it.)

Great speeches, Hillary.  I'd have paid way more than 675,000 for that wisdom.  Do you accept Zimbabwe dollars or Zambian Khoja?

I often wonder how much folks who are funny and clever could earn from going on the speaking circuit.  Think, for example, Mark Twain.  Or Oscar Wilde.  I'm hardpressed to think either one could suck in $225,000 per speech from Goldman Sachs.  Thus, I'm only left with the belief that her speaking is nothing more than Influence Peddling.

Of course, everyone here knew that.  Funny how her sycophants don't get it.