10-17-2016, 09:35 PM
So far, nothing in the stolen Wikileak contents from Clinton's campaign manager's gmails has surprised me at all. It makes me wonder if there's a bombshell coming or if what's out there is the worst there is.
From what's been released so far, it's just normal campaign/strategy stuff (for any party) which confirms that Clinton and company contemplated about how to most effectively handle controversy, how to gain advantage over her primary competitor, etc...
It also confirms what we already knew about Hillary Clinton -- she's very measured and careful in her public statements and reactions, and she didn't feel the need to apologize for using a private email server, at first.
The Goldman Sachs/Wall Street speech transcripts did, however, contain a couple of items I expect Chris Wallace will bring up in Wednesday's debate.
I think Clinton might need to address (again) what she meant when she told Goldman Sachs' execs that she takes different tones/postures with different audiences when it comes to the same policies and proposals; the 'political sausage' remark. The Abraham Lincoln response she gave in the last debate was confusing and terrible, in my opinion. And, I think she'll probably be asked to explain her statement to Wall Street a couple of years back about how she dreams of of open borders (in regards to trade, not immigration). Those questions can be easily answered in a reasonable way, which I hope she does without muddying the waters.
I saw a couple of Trump surrogates (Gulliani being one) praise the publication of stolen material by Julian Assange and WikiLeaks. Not wise. That kind of illegal cyber activity potentially threatens our country's safety and I don't think it's a matter of 'if' but 'when' someone high up in the GOP sees his/her communications stolen and published. I won't celebrate it then anymore than I do now.
From what's been released so far, it's just normal campaign/strategy stuff (for any party) which confirms that Clinton and company contemplated about how to most effectively handle controversy, how to gain advantage over her primary competitor, etc...
It also confirms what we already knew about Hillary Clinton -- she's very measured and careful in her public statements and reactions, and she didn't feel the need to apologize for using a private email server, at first.
The Goldman Sachs/Wall Street speech transcripts did, however, contain a couple of items I expect Chris Wallace will bring up in Wednesday's debate.
I think Clinton might need to address (again) what she meant when she told Goldman Sachs' execs that she takes different tones/postures with different audiences when it comes to the same policies and proposals; the 'political sausage' remark. The Abraham Lincoln response she gave in the last debate was confusing and terrible, in my opinion. And, I think she'll probably be asked to explain her statement to Wall Street a couple of years back about how she dreams of of open borders (in regards to trade, not immigration). Those questions can be easily answered in a reasonable way, which I hope she does without muddying the waters.
I saw a couple of Trump surrogates (Gulliani being one) praise the publication of stolen material by Julian Assange and WikiLeaks. Not wise. That kind of illegal cyber activity potentially threatens our country's safety and I don't think it's a matter of 'if' but 'when' someone high up in the GOP sees his/her communications stolen and published. I won't celebrate it then anymore than I do now.