Goldman Sachs paid $675,000 for three Hillary Clinton speeches in 2013, with journalists excluded from the meetings. Reporters have been routinely prohibited from covering Mrs. Clinton’s speeches before some of the nation’s most exclusive Wall Street financial investment firms, according to a Daily Caller News Foundation investigation. (Ask her again about raising the minimum wage?)
The Harry Walker Agency, Hillary Clinton’s booking agent, included requirements in her speaking contracts her remarks remain private. One copy of her contract stated, “…the speaker’s participation at the event, including the speech and reception, will be closed to the press, unless otherwise agreed in writing.” The contract also prevented any recordings of her remarks, and stated “it is understood and agreed that recording the speaker’s remarks for any purpose, including the sponsor, is not permitted.”
The list of Wall Street firms who barred reporters from her speeches is quite impressive, and includes some of the largest and most prestigious wealth management companies in the U.S. They include the Goldman Sachs Group, UBS Wealth Management, the Carlyle Group, Fidelity Investments, Morgan Stanley and Golden Tree Asset Management.
Mrs. Clinton laughed at a request to release transcripts of speeches she delivered before the Goldman Sachs Group.
Bernie Sanders has sharply criticized Hillary Clinton’s six-figure fees for speeches given to America’s wealthiest Americans. On average, Mrs. Clinton received $225,000 for each speech before financial institutions, according to her federal tax returns. Bernie Sanders has begun using a standard line when talking about Clinton’s ample speaking fees,
“You got to be really, really, really good to get $250,000 for a speech.”
The question becomes, what was discussed at those $250,000 get-togethers, and why is it private? Hillary Clinton is not a private business person. She is running a campaign to be President of the United States. She was Secretary of State. Are these private meetings (the modern equivalent of a backroom discussion) acceptable?
Tom Fitton, president of the non-profit government watchdog group, Judicial Watch, asks
“Were people paying for promises?”