WikiLeaks Releases Paid Clinton Speech Excerpts, And Threatens To Expose Google (dailymail.co.uk)

An anonymous Slashdot reader quotes the Independent: Wikileaks has dumped thousands of emails from Hillary Clinton campaign chair John Podesta, which includes apparent excerpts from Ms Clinton's paid, closed-door speeches to Wall Street executives after leaving her position as Secretary of State. In the excerpts, flagged in a 25 January email, Ms Clinton apparently suggested that Wall Street insiders were best qualified to regulate the banking industry and also included her apparent admission of the need for money from banking executives for political fundraising...

"Earlier today, the US government removed any reasonable doubt that the Kremlin has weaponized WikiLeaks to meddle in our election and benefit Donald Trump's candidacy," said Clinton campaign spokesperson Glen Caplin. "We are not going to confirm the authenticity of stolen documents released by Julian Assange who has made no secret of his desire to damage Hillary Clinton." Slashdot reader schwit1 quotes the Daily Mail's article about what's coming up next: WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange promised to release information on subjects including the U.S. election and Google [and] warned that the so called 'October Surprise' will expose Google. Assange did not reveal what type of information would be leaked about the tech giant, but his 2014 book could provide a clue. In it, he wrote: "(Eric) Schmidt's tenure as CEO saw Google integrate with the shadiest of U.S. power structures..."

Comments

Re:Wha?!?! Hilary! lied?!?! In bed with banksters?

[quantaman]

Funny how the media acts like Donald Trump's tax returns should be open records, but when it comes to important speeches Hillary Clinton delivered to Wall Street, they're cool with her treating those like state secrets.

Tax returns are a form of disclosure done by every Presidential candidate. And in Trump's case there's a very good reason, they shed light on possible conflicts of interest.

If Trump invested heavily in coal he may be tempted to push US energy policy in a certain direction.

If he invested heavily in Russia then Putin might have the ability to push him into bankruptcy (or make him and his children vastly wealthier).

Speeches on the other hand aren't traditional disclosures. Many candidates have given paid speeches, I'm not aware of any others who have been asked to release them. It's similar to Obama's long form birth certificate. Sure there's nothing to hide, but to grant the request is also to legitimize the question.

Re:What's good for the goose

[geoskd]

There was no rigging.

The superdelegates are election tampering. Their express purpose is to allow the Political elite to shut out candidates, or promote one of their own. The republicans have the same structure, but did not give their superdelegates enough power to override the crazy train.

We'll probably never know if Sanders would have won without the Democratic National Committee and the superdelegates doing everything in their power to shut out Sanders. That is why, in spite of facing an imbecile for an opponent, the democrats could still manage to lose this election. The Democrats political elite severely tampered with this election and they know it, and for many people that kind of tampering is enough to prevent them from ever voting for Clinton. There is a small minority of people who will vote for Trump now, just to watch it all burn and teach the god damn career politicians a lesson.

Re:Two-minute warning

[meta-monkey]

A bunch of #NeverTrumpers said again "Never Trump." This isn't shocking. We don't have two political parties. We have a uniparty system that does whatever Wall Street and the military industrial complex want while the corporate owned media keep all the peasants fighting over fags and abortions. So Republicans denouncing Trump is hardly news. They're paid by the same people who pay for the DNC.

Re:Interesting

[whoever57]

Let's see what Wikipedia has to say:

Ireland: "While there are a number of political parties in the state, the political landscape has been dominated for decades by Fianna FÃil and Fine Gael, historically opposed and competing entities"

Brazil: "Due to a mix of proportional voting (the only first-past-the-post elections are for the 1/3 of senate seats every 8 years and for mayors in small and medium-sized cities every 4 years), the lack of election threshold and the cultural aspects of Latin American caudillismo-coronelismo, party politics in Brazil tends to be highly fragmented.

Denmark: "Of the 179 members of parliament, the Faroe Islands and Greenland elect two members each, 135 are elected from ten multi-member constituencies on a party list PR system using the d'Hondt method and the remaining 40 seats are allocated to ensure proportionality at a national level."

Do I need to go on? Either they don't use a first-past-the-post voting system, or they are effectively 2-party states.

Re:Oh No! Trump opened his mouth again!

[Tough Love]

"You know, I’m automatically attracted to beautiful — I just start kissing them. It’s like a magnet. Just kiss. I don’t even wait. And when you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything... Grab ’em by the pussy. You can do anything." -- Donald Trump, candidate for the office of president of the united states of america.