Comments on: Rooting for GOP opposition research on Hillary

By: Arthur Lieber

Arthur Lieber — Thu, 12 May 2016 19:37:00 +0000

In reply to Willy Kessler. I agree to agree.

By: Willy Kessler

Willy Kessler — Thu, 12 May 2016 18:45:00 +0000

I basically agree with you that it’s best to get it all out there – however, I think that the politics of it for Hillary Clinton is lose-lose no matter what she does. I think that she’s chosen to try to minimize the noise. Whether or not that’s the right choice … who knows?

By: Arthur Lieber

Arthur Lieber — Thu, 12 May 2016 15:20:00 +0000

In reply to Willy Kessler. I think that the best way to minimize distortion is through the light of sunshine. I think that Hillary could explain away most of what she said, because as you said, it was likely blather. By not making them public, it becomes a cesspool of rumor and distortion. I agree that there seems to have been nothing to Whitewater, Benghazi, etc., but that is in part because they have seen the light of day. I understand her trepidation, but she's losing momentum and something bold might help.

By: Willy Kessler

Willy Kessler — Wed, 11 May 2016 17:37:00 +0000

As for the Goldman Sachs speeches, Kevin Drum points out how easily the usual keynote speech blather can be distorted by those intent on doing damage to Clinton: http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/04/everyone-knows-why-hillary-clinton-wont-release-her-goldman-sachs-speeches. Good reason to withhold them – we all saw how the get-Hillary brigade recently went after an out of context comment about coal mining.

As for resurrecting nothing burgers like Whitewater, etc., I cannot understand how progressives allow ourselves to be roped into pretending there was ever any there there. There’s scads of evidence that these are trumped up narratives. Same goes for Benghazi and and the widely misunderstood FBI email server investigation.

By: Stacy Mergenthal

Stacy Mergenthal — Tue, 10 May 2016 19:02:00 +0000

It’s a very practical and reasonable position to take, I never thought of it in this way. I too am curious about the contents of the speeches, but I am more cynical about it. Of course, this is another on a long this of reasons why we need campaign finance reform. Without the need to beg for campaign money, politicians can no longer use it as an excuse for cozying up to moneyed interests. I like the idea of sharing ideas rather than favors. When ideas are exchanged, everyone wins. Favors only benefit the recipient.

Of course, it would be ideal for those transcripts to leak as soon as possible so that Bernie can win the Democratic nomination and trounce Trump in November. 🙂