Slashdot Mirror


Clinton Responds To WikiLeaks During Debate, And Blames Russian Hackers (qz.com)

An anonymous Slashdot reader writes:During Sunday night's debate between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, moderators asked a question based on WikiLeaks documents released Friday -- to which both candidates responded. The leaked emails had included excerpts from Hillary's paid speeches to Wall Street in which she reportedly said "You need both a public and a private position on certain issues."

Clinton said she had been describing the 2012 movie Lincoln, and that Lincoln's use of different arguments for different groups of people was "a great display of presidential leadership." Then, citing intelligence reports, she said "Putin and the Russian government are directing the attacks -- the hacking on American accounts to influence our election...for Donald Trump."

Click through for a complete transcript of Clinton's remarks -- and Trump's response.
The question -- based on the WikiLeaks release -- was, "Is it okay for politicians to be two-faced? Is it acceptable for a politician to have a private stance on issues?"


Hillary Clinton's response:

Right. As I recall, that was something I said about Abraham Lincoln, after having seen the wonderful Steven Spielberg movie called Lincoln. It was a master class, watching President Lincoln get the Congress to approve the 13th Amendment. It was principled, and it was strategic. And I was making the point that it is hard sometimes to get the Congress to do what you want to do, and you have to keep working at it. And yes, President Lincoln was trying to convince some people, he used some arguments, convincing other people he used other arguments. That was a great -- I thought, a great display of presidential leadership.

But you know, let's talk about what's really going on here, Martha, because our intelligence community just came out and said in the last few days that the Kremlin, meaning Putin and the Russian government, are directing the attacks -- the hacking on American accounts to influence our election. And WikiLeaks is part of that, as are other sites where the Russians hack information -- we don't even know if it's accurate information -- and then they put it out. We have never, in the history of our country, been in a situation where an adversary, a foreign power, is working so hard to influence the outcome of the election. And believe me they're not doing it to get me elected. They're doing it to try to influence the election for Donald Trump.

Now maybe because he has praised Putin. Maybe because he says he agrees with a lot of what Putin wants to do. Maybe because he wants to do business in Moscow -- I don't know the reasons. But we deserve answers. And we should demand that Donald release all of his tax returns, so that people can see what are the entanglements and the financial relationship that he has with Russian and other foreign powers.


Donald Trump's response:

Well I think I should respond because -- so ridiculous. Look, now she's blaming -- she got caught in a total lie. Her papers went out to all her friends at the banks, Goldman Sachs and everybody else, and she said things -- WikiLeaks, that just came out. And you lied. Now she's blaming the lie on the late, great Abraham Lincoln. That's one that I haven't heard. [Audience laughs] Okay, honest Abe. Honest Abe never lied. That's the good thing. That's the big difference between Abraham Lincoln and you. That's a big, big difference. We're talking about some difference.

But as far as other elements of what she was saying, I don't know Putin. I think it would be great if we got along with Russia, because we could fight ISIS together, as an example -- but I don't know Putin. But I notice any time anything wrong happens, they like to say, "The Russians are..." She doesn't know if it's the Russians doing the hacking. Maybe there is no hacking. But they always blame Russia.

And the reason they blame is because they think they're trying to tarnish me with Russia. I know nothing about Russia. I know -- I know about Russia, but I know nothing about the inner workings of Russia. I don't deal there, I have no businesses there, I have no loans from Russia.

I have a very, very great balance sheet, so great that when I did the old post office on Pennsylvania Avenue, the United States government, because of my balance sheet, which they actually know very well, chose me to do the old post office between the White House and Congress -- chose me to do the old post office. One of the primary things, in fact perhaps the primary thing, was balance sheet. But I have no loans with Russia. You could go to the United States government, and they would probably tell you that, because they know my sheet very well.

In order to get that development, I had to have -- now the taxes are a very simple thing. As soon as I have -- first of all, I paid hundreds of millions of dollars in taxes. Many of her friends took bigger deductions -- Warren Buffett took a massive deduction. Soros, who's a friend of hers, took a massive deduction. Many of the people that are giving her all this money, that she can do many more commercials than me, gave or took massive deductions. I pay hundreds of millions of dollars in taxes, but -- but, as soon as my routine audit's finished, I'll release my returns. I'll be very proud to.

4 of 689 comments (clear)

  1. A momentary look of genuine anger from Hillary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Most of the time Hillary's emotions look totally fake to me - especially the smiles and laughs.

    But, when Trump seemed to be suggesting that everyone remaining in Aleppo was a rebel - and therefore ISIS - and that the Assad dictatorship and Russia should therefore be allowed to annihilate them, for a brief moment she looked genuinely angry.

    Maybe her attention was just wondering back to the personal insults at the beginning of the date. But, for just a moment, I was able to imagine that she genuinely cared about something other than her own personal glory, and I had this fleeting thought that she was almost someone I could vote for.

  2. Its Russia's Fault Translation by hackus · · Score: 5, Interesting

    We want that pipeline from the middle east through Syria to Eastern Europe so we can destroy GAZPROM, and any Russian influence in EU energy planning.

    I am not kidding. We are on the verge of going to war with Russia in Syria over a stupid oil pipeline.

    This has nothing to do with Assad other than the fact he said NO to the pipeline.

    We are comfortable with other Dictators we call friends but somehow Assad is a really bad man.

    What crap.

    --
    Got Geometrodynamics? Awe, too hard to figure out? Too bad.
  3. Re:Great by golodh · · Score: 5, Interesting
    That's what worrying me. It is as if people (especially his voters and journalists) have totally given up on holding mr. Trump to account on anything he says, much less on whether his words are true or reasonable. Mr. Trump has turned politics into a "reality show". Substance doesn't matter, but tone and appearance do. And personal attacks. Mr. Trump's one area of competence is personal attacks.

    It seems as if mrs. Clinton is held to a different standard of decency and veracity. One that simply doesn't apply to Mr. Trump because he's so far off the scale all of the time.

    Like mr Trump's constant tendency to say whatever sounds good at the time, no matter how misleading, counter-factual or how much it contradicts what he said earlier (Putin comes to mind: first he calls him his buddy, now he says he doesn't know).

    Most Trump supporters overlook all of that all of the time. What they forget is that no-one else in the world will.

    Especially foreign powers. And that's dangerous because the US's strength has irrevocably decreased compared to the rest of the world. Therefore consistent policy and competent diplomacy is the only way to safeguard US interests ... and security. Mr. Trump's volatile character will ensure he'll scupper whatever policy framework his GOP aides erect. And this time, if he tries to bankrupt his way out of trouble again, it's the entire US that will be saddled with his debts.

    Only a video tape with tacky (and in my opinion largely irrelevant because we already knew he's a nasty piece of work) locker room banter and a review of several years' worth of appearance on the Howard Stern show seem to be able to somehow get through to them where obvious deficiencies in competence and intelligence don't.

  4. Re:Serious question by dbIII · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Not quite so simple. Backing one faction over the other for some years turned it into an angry bloodbath when we pulled out and that faction was no longer strong.
    It needed careful management. Instead we had Rumsfeld and similar wastes of space calling the shots. He picked a side arbitrarily without having the least clue what he was doing.

    Even a brutal dictator is better than anarchy.

    Sometimes it's hard to be sure, and besides, it's rarely true anarchy anyway since there are existing power structures that can step in. For example, it's no accident that Egypt ended up with an Islamic government, the religious groups were the only ones that had been allowed to meet and organise because political assemblies had been banned for years. All other groups had to start from tiny secret cells or from zero while the people in the religious political groups had been meeting for years.