Posted on 08/30/2016 11:56:45 AM PDT by grundle
In November 2011, a Swedish telecom company called Ericsson paid Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s husband, Bill Clinton, $750,000 for giving a speech. In April 2012, Obama signed an executive order which placed sanctions on telecom sales to Iran and Syria. However, Ericsson was given an exemption from these sanctions.
In this instance, how is “paying for a speech” any different than “giving a bribe”?
If you or I did that, it would be a “bribe”.
If the Clinton’s do that, it is “legitimate income”.
I hope that clears it up for you.
No difference, whatsoever...
Since Hilary refuses to release any transcripts, it is doubtful that any speeches were ever given.
Can you imagine. With all the speeches, no one has ever come forward and told (off the record) what was in one of Hilary speeches. What are the odds of that???
Hire Bill or give to the Clinton Foundation.
It’s a total coincidence that soon thereafter you get something you want from the Obama Administration and Clinton State Department.
Honest!
Would they lie to us?
“No difference, whatsoever...”
The bribe usually paid before the favor, the speech occurs after the favor ...
Wasn’t there a Senator who got nailed for something similar to this. It may have been Jim Wright and I think it cost him his House speakership. He “wrote” a book which consisted mostly of just a collection of old campaign speeches. The only ones who bought this “book” were those institutional buyers seeking influence who would buy thousands of copies at a time.
You know, I never thought about the possibility that she never showed up and never delivered a speech. Your theory makes a lot of sense. I’ve wondered why nobody has ever said they were there.
Actually a good question. If you were to pay someone $750K for a speech you would want it recorded or at least have a bunch of people attending, of which you would think someone would record it on their cell phones.
Does anyone have any source for Bill’s speeches?
Ole Jim just didn’t know how to think big enough, did he?
The biggest US scandal before Watergate was Teapot Dome. About $7 million in 2016 dollars was paid. How much have Clintons hauled down? A billion?
The amp goes up to 11.
It’s the Clintons. They are above the law, as has been demonstrated many, many, times.
My last paid speech was $750. They left off several digits and it barely paid my travel costs.
At more than about $10,000 a pop, it’s a bribe.
I sure would like to hear some CEOs explain why they pay such astronomical sums for Clinton speeches on the evening news.
Are there no journalists worthy of the name in the USA?
How is this two line vanity any different that outright pimping of a worthless blog?
(Hint: It isn't.)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.