Hillary’s Goldman Sachs Speech Part Two…

Here is part two of the entire Hillary Clinton speech to Goldman Sachs in South Carolina back in 2013. A lot has been made of her speeches. You decide for yourself. Thanks again to zerohedge.com and WikiLeaks for providing the information.

 

  1. BLANKFEIN: Isn’t it amazing that we can go through and think of Europe as an afterthought?
  2. CLINTON: Our allies?
  3. BLANKFEIN: Our allies. The US is now oriented towards the Pacific and looking that way. It’s another surprise, having grown up as we did, that our attention would be so focused on Asia. But I guess we have a training issue with the EU.
  4. CLINTON: Yes.
  5. BLANKFEIN: Of course everybody here in the financial service industry is very focused on trying to harmonize different — but from our point of view what is incomprehensible is the governance of Europe and the consequences of Brussels and the single currency that no one has any account of, and the fact is they may not be as important if they don’t get their economy in shape and they don’t grow over the course of the next — any observations there?
  6. CLINTON: Well, certainly we are always looking to Europe as our allies of first resort. Our common values, our common history. All of that is really just baked into the DNA of how we think about our future, and NATO remains the most important and really remarkable military alliance, I think, in human history. So there is a lot that we are still very attentive to and working on. There is no doubt that Europe is going through — you know better than I — some serious readjustments. Where they will come out I don’t think any of us are in a position yet to predict. It may be in Europe what Winston Churchill used to say about us: The Americans will finally get to the right answer after trying nearly everything else, and maybe they will stumble and work their way toward more accommodation in recognizing the realities of what it means to have a common currency without a common system to back up that currency. So I would certainly not count the Europeans out, but I think they have a lot of work to do. And I’m actually more concerned from another perspective. I think that unless the national leaders and the European union and Eurozone leaders get their act together, you will see some pretty unpredictable leaders and political parties coming to the forefront in a lot of countries. You’ll see a lot of nationalism. You will see a lot of chauvinism. You’ll see UK parties that is — winning elections in UK is going to push Cameron and his coalition government to the right as it moves towards an election — I think in 2015. What does that mean for Europe? What does that mean for our relationship? You’ve got the NATO military alliance already being starved of necessary funds because of all the budgets, and most of the European countries have been so decimated. So I think that — it’s not clear to me where it’s going to come out yet. They have to take a lot of really unpleasant medicines, and some are more willing to do that that others and see whether or not they have the political will to make these hard decisions individually and collectively, and right now I think the jury is out. But on the trade and regulatory harmonization, we are very serious about that and something that I strongly supported. The discussions are ongoing. It will come down, as it often does, to agriculture, particularly French agriculture, and we’ll just have to see how much we can get done by that process. And there is no doubt that if we can make progress on the trade regulatory front it would be good for the Europeans. It would be good for us. And I would like to see us go as far as we possibly can with a real agreement, not a phony agreement. You know, the EU signs agreements all the time with nearly everybody, but they don’t change anything. They just kind of sign them and see what comes of it. I think we have an opportunity to really actually save money in our respective regulatory schemes, increase trade not only between ourselves but also be more effective in helping to keep the world on a better track for a rural spaced global trading system by having us kind of set the standards for that, along with the TPC, which we didn’t mention when we talked about Asia, which I think is also still proceeding.
  7. BLANKFEIN: I think we need to open it up to some questions now, and if there is a pregnant pause I know what to follow up with.

PARTICIPANT: One question for you.

  1. BLANKFEIN: Do me a favor? Why don’t we introduce ourselves to the secretary when you ask a question.

PARTICIPANT: Secretary, Jeff Gordon with Diverse Technologies. As you examine the global situation, if you were to turn back toward the domestic side and look here at the US and after the 2012 elections and give your own kind of third-party assessment of what do we have to do on each side of the aisle to get America back to a functional government. Because we’ve heard a lot even today that the government has really gotten to a point of dysfunctionality that may be almost unprecedented. So just stepping back a little while and just saying: What do you think? What is your perspective on where the parties are and what we have to do to kind of solve the problems here domestically so that we can come up with a unified approach?

  1. CLINTON: I know — I heard Leon was here and was his usual shy and reluctant self to express an opinion and certainly never to use any colorful language, but I’m sure “dysfunctional” was probably the best of the words he used to describe what is going on in Washington. Look, I think there is a couple of things. One, I talk a lot about it, and I talked about it when I was a senator. I talked about it as Secretary. I’m talking about it now. You know, we have to get back to at least trying to make evidence based decisions. I know that sounds so simplistic, but the ideological partisan position on all sides — because there are people who refuse to look at facts and deal with them, coming from many different perspectives — really undermines confidence in the people. The American people are smart. They may not be living and breathing politics, but they’re looking and they’re thinking: Come on, guys. Get it together. You ought to be able to make a deal of some sort. You know, when my husband spoke at the the Democratic Convention he basically touted the virtues of arithmetic. Can you imagine a major speech having to be made about how arithmetic needs to be used as the basis for budgetary discussions? But in fact, we do need more of an outcry and pressure from the rest of the American system, not just the politicians but business leaders and others who are saying: Let’s try to figure out how we’re going to move forward based on as near an evidence-based foundation as we possibly can manage. Secondly, you know, people get rewarded for being partisan, and that’s on both sides. The biggest threat that Democrats and Republicans face today, largely because of gerrymandering in the House, is getting a primary opponent from either the far right or the far left. You know, there is no reason you would have noticed this, but there was a woman in the Senate — and I think it was Kentucky — recently who had an A plus rating from the NRA. A plus rating. She was a country legislator, highly regarded, and she was a chairman of a committee in the state legislature. And somebody introduced a bill with — you know, it’s not too much exaggeration to say that you should have your gun in your car at all times and it should be visible. And she said: Let’s table it for a minute and think about the consequences. So the NRA recruited an opponent for her who beat her. They put a lot of money into it and basically: You couldn’t be reasonable. You couldn’t say let’s try to reason this out together. You had to tow the line, and whether it’s a financial line or gun control line or whatever the line might be. But people let that happen. Voters let that happen. I mean, the number of people who ask me questions very similar to what you asked I’m sure is representative of millions of people who feel the same way. If you look at the polling and all the rest of it that’s clear. But you need people who will stand up and say: I want somebody who exercises some judgment. I want somebody who is not just a mouthpiece for one point of view or another. I may have my own opinions, but let’s have a debate here. That’s what we were always good at in the past.
  2. BLANKFEIN: Wasn’t it a virtue compromise at one point?
  3. CLINTON: Yes.
  4. BLANKFEIN: A compromise

— MS. CLINTON: Because in a democracy, especially as diverse as this one, which is not a theocracy or an autocracy. We don’t think anybody or any party or any interest group has a lock on the truth. We actually think people bring their experience, their ability to think to the table, and then you hammer it out. And the compromise may not be perfect. In fact, it rarely is, but it represents the big thinking and the political will that is currently available in order to make a decision. And I was in Hong Kong in the summer of 2011 and I had a preexisting program with a big business group there, and before we had a reception and there were about a hundred business leaders, many of them based in Hong Kong, some of them from mainland China, some of them from Singapore and elsewhere. They were lining up and saying to me: Is it true that the American Congress might default on America’s full faith and credit, their standing, that you won’t pay your bills? And you know I’m sitting there I’m representing all of you. I said: Oh, no. No. No. That’s just politics. We’ll work it through. And I’m sitting there: Oh, boy. I hope that is the case. So for all of their efforts to take advantage of whatever mistake we might make or whatever problem we might have, they know right now at least in 2013, the beginning of this century, the United States isn’t strong at home and abroad. They’ve got problems, and it is for me pretty simple. If we don’t get our political house in order and demonstrate that we can start making decisions again — and that takes hard work. I mean, don’t — I’ve served. I’ve been an elected official, an appointed official. There is nothing easy about working toward a compromise. I give a lot of credit to the eight senators, four Republicans and four Democrats in the Senate. You go from very conservative to what we would call very liberal. And they have sat down and they hammered out a compromise, and then they made a pledge they would stick to it as it went through the regular order of the committee hearing. How unusual. That used to be what we did in Congress. You know, people would get together and they would have hearings and then they would introduce bills and then they would mark them up, and you would win some and you would lose some, and then you go to the floor. And we need to get back to doing that, but the American people need to demand that that is what is expected. And I don’t care if you’re a liberal icon or a conservative icon. If you are not willing to be active in your democracy and do what is necessary to deal with our problems, I think you should be voted out. I think you should just be voted out, and I would like to see more people saying that.

PARTICIPANT: Secretary, Ann Chow from Houston, Texas. I have had the honor to raise money for you when you were running for president in Texas.

  1. CLINTON: You are the smartest people.

PARTICIPANT: I think you actually called me on my cell phone, too. I talked to you afterwards. I think the biggest question in this room is: Do you think you’re going to run for president again?

  1. BLANKFEIN: I was going to bet that wouldn’t come up.
  2. CLINTON: I don’t believe you. Well, look. I don’t know. I’m certainly not planning it. I’ve been out of the state department for what, four months? Four months.
  3. BLANKFEIN: You look like you are ready to get back.
  4. CLINTON: I am ready to continue to kind of think through what I’m doing and what I want to do. So I haven’t made any decision and I’m not prepared to make any decision. I mean, on the one hand, as you could probably tell from my answers, I feel very strongly about our country and what is happening, and for me it just defies reason that we are in this paralysis at a time when we’ve got so much going for us and we could be so strong again and we could deal with so many of our problems. We were talking at dinner. I mean, thethe same way. If you look at the polling and all the rest of it that’s clear. But you need people who will stand up and say: I want somebody who exercises some judgment. I want somebody who is not just a mouthpiece for one point of view or another. I may have my own opinions, but let’s have a debate here. That’s what we were always good at in the past. MR. BLANKFEIN: Wasn’t it a virtue compromise at one point? MS. CLINTON: Yes. MR. BLANKFEIN: A compromise — MS. CLINTON: Because in a democracy, especially as diverse as this one, which is not a theocracy or an autocracy. We don’t think anybody or any party or any interest group has a lock on the truth. We actually think people bring their experience, their ability to think to the table, and then you hammer it out. And the compromise may not be perfect. In fact, it rarely is, but it represents the big thinking and the political will that is currently available in order to make a decision. And I was in Hong Kong in the summer of 2011 and I had a preexisting program with a big business group there, and before we had a reception and there were about a hundred business leaders, many of them based in Hong Kong, some of them from mainland China, some of them from Singapore and elsewhere. They were lining up and saying to me: Is it true that the American Congress might default on America’s full faith and credit, their standing, that you won’t pay your bills? And you know I’m sitting there I’m representing all of you. I said: Oh, no. No.

 

26 No. That’s just politics. We’ll work it through. And I’m sitting there: Oh, boy. I hope that is the case. So for all of their efforts to take advantage of whatever mistake we might make or whatever problem we might have, they know right now at least in 2013, the beginning of this century, the United States isn’t strong at home and abroad. They’ve got problems, and it is for me pretty simple. If we don’t get our political house in order and demonstrate that we can start making decisions again — and that takes hard work. I mean, don’t — I’ve served. I’ve been an elected official, an appointed official. There is nothing easy about working toward a compromise. I give a lot of credit to the eight senators, four Republicans and four Democrats in the Senate. You go from very conservative to what we would call very liberal. And they have sat down and they hammered out a compromise, and then they made a pledge they would stick to it as it went through the regular order of the committee hearing. How unusual. That used to be what we did in Congress. You know, people would get together and they would have hearings and then they would introduce bills and then they would mark them up, and you would win some and you would lose some, and then you go to the floor. And we need to get back to doing that, but the American people need to demand that that is what is expected. And I don’t care if you’re a liberal icon or a conservative icon. If you are not willing to be active in your democracy and do what is necessary to deal with our problems, I think you should be voted out. I think you should just be voted out, and I would like to see more people saying that.

PARTICIPANT: Secretary, Ann Chow from Houston, Texas. I have had the honor to raise money for you when you were running for president in Texas.

  1. CLINTON: You are the smartest people.

PARTICIPANT: I think you actually called me on my cell phone, too. I talked to you afterwards. I think the biggest question in this room is: Do you think you’re going to run for president again?

  1. BLANKFEIN: I was going to bet that wouldn’t come up.
  2. CLINTON: I don’t believe you. Well, look. I don’t know. I’m certainly not planning it. I’ve been out of the state department for what, four months? Four months.
  3. BLANKFEIN: You look like you are ready to get back.
  4. CLINTON: I am ready to continue to kind of think through what I’m doing and what I want to do. So I haven’t made any decision and I’m not prepared to make any decision. I mean, on the one hand, as you could probably tell from my answers, I feel very strongly about our country and what is happening, and for me it just defies reason that we are in this paralysis at a time when we’ve got so much going for us and we could be so strong again and we could deal with so many of our problems. We were talking at dinner. I mean, the energy revolution in the United States is just a gift, and we’re able to exploit it and use it and it’s going to make us independent. We can have a North American energy system that will be unbelievably powerful. If we have enough of it we can be exporting and supporting a lot of our friends and allies. And there are other ways that we can put ourselves on a better footing, like passing a decent immigration law and dealing with our budget and being smart about it and realizing there is two sides to the equation. You’ve got to have spending restraints and you’ve got to have some revenues in order to stimulate growth. I happen to think that part of the reason we are coming out of where we were a few years ago in part is because we did do that, unlike some of the choices the Europeans made. So I mean, we have teed up well if we just keep going and make these hard political decisions. And so I very much want to watch and see what happens in the next couple of years before I make any decision. Because honestly, it’s kind of nice being on my own schedule. It’s kind of nice living in my own house.
  5. BLANKFEIN: In South Carolina?
  6. CLINTON: Yeah. Right. Here in South Carolina. Jus t traveling around. It’s the first time I’ve been traveling in my own country for four years. It’s kind of nice. So I’m just taking it kind of easy, but thank for what you did for me in two 2008. MR. BLANKFEIN: Just as a hypothetical, if someone were going to eventually have an entry in this and given that people line up and other people test the waters and people put their hat in and start to raise money but they wouldn’t want to do the impossible or intervene — you know, at what point would somebody — not you, but would somebody have to manifest some interest? Or would it start to become clear or would the observer start to say: This was some critical moment we see what she did here. For example, our very own governor declared that he was going to wait. You can’t let people wait forever.
  7. CLINTON: You think not?
  8. BLANKFEIN: In his case it might be the best thing to wait.
  9. CLINTON: Well, this is just hypothetical and not about me.
  10. BLANKFEIN: I’m saying for myself.
  11. CLINTON: If you were going to run here is what I would tell you to do

— MR. BLANKFEIN: Very hypothetical.

  1. CLINTON: I think you would leave Goldman Sachs and start running a soup kitchen somewhere.
  2. BLANKFEIN: For one thing the stock would go up.
  3. CLINTON: Then you could be a legend in your own time both when you were there and when you left.
  4. BLANKFEIN: Enough about me.
  5. CLINTON: Look, I am of the mind that we cannot have endless campaigns. It is bad for the candidates. It’s bad for the country. I mean, part of the reason why it’s difficult to govern is because an election ends and then the next day people start jockeying for the next — do your job. Get up and do the job you were elected to do. I believe that doing your job actually is the right thing to do. So I mean, I am constantly amazed at how attention deficit disordered the political punditry is. Because there is a lot to cover. There is so much that you could actually be educating people about. The difference that I experienced from running for the Senate, being in the Senate, running for president and being Secretary of State is that the press which covered me in the state department were really interested in the issues. I mean, they would drill them. They would have asked a hundred more questions about everything Lloyd has asked in the time that they had with me because they really cared about what I thought, what the US government was doing in these issues. Our political press has just been captured by trivia. I mean, to me. And so you don’t want to give them any more time to trivialize the importance of the issues than you have to give them. You want to be able to wait as long as possible, because hopefully we will actually see some progress on immigration, for example. Maybe circumstances will force some kind of budget deal. It doesn’t look too promising, but stranger things have happened. So let’s give some space and some attention to these issues instead of who is going to run and what they’re going to do and: Oh, my gosh. What is happening tomorrow? But if someone were going to run, given the process of raising money, given the — you know, for better or worse I apparently have about a hundred percent name recognition. Most of it my mother would say is not true, but I live with it. energy revolution in the United States is just a gift, and we’re able to exploit it and use it and it’s going to make us independent. We can have a North American energy system that will be unbelievably powerful. If we have enough of it we can be exporting and supporting a lot of our friends and allies. And there are other ways that we can put ourselves on a better footing, like passing a decent immigration law and dealing with our budget and being smart about it and realizing there is two sides to the equation. You’ve got to have spending restraints and you’ve got to have some revenues in order to stimulate growth. I happen to think that part of the reason we are coming out of where we were a few years ago in part is because we did do that, unlike some of the choices the Europeans made. So I mean, we have teed up well if we just keep going and make these hard political decisions. And so I very much want to watch and see what happens in the next couple of years before I make any decision. Because honestly, it’s kind of nice being on my own schedule. It’s kind of nice living in my own house.
  6. BLANKFEIN: In South Carolina?
  7. CLINTON: Yeah. Right. Here in South Carolina. Just traveling around. It’s the first time I’ve been traveling in my own country for four years. It’s kind of nice. So I’m just taking it kind of easy, but thank for what you did for me in two 2008.
  8. BLANKFEIN: Just as a hypothetical, if someone were going to eventually have an entry in this and given that people line up and other people test the waters and people put their hat in and start to raise money but they wouldn’t want to do the impossible or intervene — you know, at what point would somebody — not you, but would somebody have to manifest some interest? Or would it start to become clear or would the observer start to say: This was some critical moment we see what she did here. For example, our very own governor declared that he was going to wait. You can’t let people wait forever.
  9. CLINTON: You think not?
  10. BLANKFEIN: In his case it might be the best thing to wait.
  11. CLINTON: Well, this is just hypothetical and not about me.
  12. BLANKFEIN: I’m saying for myself.
  13. CLINTON: If you were going to run here is what I would tell you to do

— MR. BLANKFEIN: Very hypothetical.

  1. CLINTON: I think you would leave Goldman Sachs and start running a soup kitchen somewhere.
  2. BLANKFEIN: For one thing the stock would go up.
  3. CLINTON: Then you could be a legend in your own time both when you were there and when you left.
  4. BLANKFEIN: Enough about me.
  5. CLINTON: Look, I am of the mind that we cannot have endless campaigns. It is bad for the candidates. It’s bad for the country. I mean, part of the reason why it’s difficult to govern is because an election ends and then the next day people start jockeying for the next — do your job. Get up and do the job you were elected to do. I believe that doing your job actually is the right thing to do. So I mean, I am constantly amazed at how attention deficit disordered the political punditry is. Because there is a lot to cover. There is so much that you could actually be educating people about. The difference that I experienced from running for the Senate, being in the Senate, running for president and being Secretary of State is that the press which covered me in the state department were really interested in the issues. I mean, they would drill them. They would have asked a hundred more questions about everything Lloyd has asked in the time that they had with me because they really cared about what I thought, what the US government was doing in these issues. Our political press has just been captured by trivia. I mean, to me. And so you don’t want to give them any more time to trivialize the importance of the issues than you have to give them. You want to be able to wait as long as possible, because hopefully we will actually see some progress on immigration, for example. Maybe circumstances will force some kind of budget deal. It doesn’t look too promising, but stranger things have happened. So let’s give some space and some attention to these issues instead of who is going to run and what they’re going to do and: Oh, my gosh. What is happening tomorrow? But if someone were going to run, given the process of raising money, given the — you know, for better or worse I apparently have about a hundred percent name recognition. Most of it my mother would say is not true, but I live with it. it’s very hard to budget for disasters. I mean, you can fund FEMA, you can have a pool of money, but given what we’re going through right now with one thing after another it’s a difficult challenge. So I think that we’re going to have to take seriously how we fund disasters, but I think Peter’s point was a larger one, which is — you know, New York is kind of an ATM machine for both Democrats and Republicans, and people come up and they visit with many of you and they ask for money, and often they’re given — if they’re coming they’re going to get it. And at some point the American public — and particularly political givers — have to say: Here — and it’s not just about me. It’s not just about my personal standings. Here are things I want you to do for the country and be part of that debate about the country.
  6. BLANKFEIN: I have to say we Republicans — we obviously reach out to both sets. To a person — a person regarded as someone who may be expected to be more partisan and has spent so much time is is very, very well liked by the Republicans.

PARTICIPANT: First off I would like to thank you for all the years. Of course, I’m on the other side.

  1. CLINTON: The dark side?

PARTICIPANT: It’s the dark side right now, but otherwise the sun does come through. You have to be an optimist. But you have to put a great, great effort, and I commend you for it. But I would like two things. No. 1, you just talked about Sandy. And since you were First Lady and a senator — forget the Secretary. But what is wrong with our politicians — I served in the Corps of Engineers. Whether it’s in Iraq, Iran — anyplace outside the US you can build bridges overnight. You could have gone into Sandy. You could have gone into New Orleans. The actual problem is the law from the 1800s. No military, which is the only force, not the National Guard. They don’t have crap. It’s the military. Like down in New Orleans. If we would just change the dumb law — because it hasn’t been changed because politicians have no say once the president declares it martial law. Put the military up. They would have cleaned up that coast. You wouldn’t have the frigging mess you have today. But we can do it for everybody else in the world, but we don’t do it because the state judges don’t have no authority. The mayor don’t have no authority, because you’re going to put a military officer in charge. That’s one question why you haven’t looked at –

  1. BLANKFEIN: They did that in New Orleans.

PARTICIPANT: Forget the — the second thing you mentioned about Afghanistan. Most people don’t realize the Russians were there before us for ten years and whatever, and we supported Tannenbaum to beat the hell out of them. A lot of our problems is because we have a competition with the Russians. If we would — the Russians by nature hate the Chinese, but forget that. If we were more or less kind of like forget that superpower, superpower, and work with them — two superpowers equal a hell of a lot more in the world. You wouldn’t have an Iranian problem, we wouldn’t have the Syrian problem, and why don’t we just cut Israel loose? Give them the frigging bomb and just blow the thing up. That’s my question to you.

  1. CLINTON: Those are interesting questions for sure. First, I think you’re referring to the posse comitatus, which has been actually in existence — if not from the end of the 18th century, the very beginning, as you said, of the 19th century. And it is a law that really limits what the military, the US military, can do on our soil, and it has been supported all these years in part because there is a great suspicion by many of US government power — and there is no more obvious evidence of that than the US military. However, we do call out the National Guard, which is under the control, as you know, of the governor and the adjutant general. But it is clearly in the line of command as well from the Pentagon. So although it took some difficulties with Katrina we did get the National Guard out. With Sandy we got the National Guard out. But you’re right, that if you were to want to have the military, the actual US military involved in disaster recovery, you would have to change the law. And it’s something that would be a big fight in Congress because a lot of people would not vote to change a law that would give any additional authority to any president, Republican or democratic, to order the US military to go anywhere in the United States. We kid about it, but I used to see it all the time when I was a senator. There is this great fear that the US military is going to show up and take away your guns and confiscate your experience. You remember when Castro opened the prisons and sent all the criminals to the United States?
  2. BLANKFEIN: The –
  3. CLINTON: A lot of those prisoners were ordered to go to a fort in Ft. Smith, Arkansas, Ft. Chaffee, and my husband was governor of Arkansas at the time. It was a military fort, so the United States military ran it. So if you were on the fort you were under US military authority, but if you stepped off the fort you were not. And the result was there was a riot where prisoners were breaking through the gates, and the US military would not stop them. So my husband as governor had to call out the state police. So you had the military inside basically saying under the law we can’t do anything even to stop prisoners from Cuba. So it is complicated, but it’s complicated in part for a reason, because we do not ever want to turn over to our military the kind of civilian authority that should be exercised by elected officials. So I think that’s the explanation. And finally on Afghanistan and Russia. Look, I would love it if we could continue to build a more positive relationship with Russia. I worked very hard on that when I was Secretary, and we made some progress with Medvedev, who was president in name but was obviously beholden to Putin, but Putin kind of let him go and we helped them get into the WTO for several years, and they were helpful to us in shipping equipment, even lethal equipment, in and out of out of Afghanistan. So we were making progress, and I think Putin has a different view. Certainly he’s asserted himself in a way now that is going to take some management on our side, but obviously we would very much like to have a positive relationship with Russia and we would like to see Putin be less defensive toward a relationship with the United States so that we could work together on some issues. We’ve tried very hard to work with Putin on shared issues like missile defense. They have rejected that out of hand. So I think it’s what diplomacy is about. You just keep going back and keep trying. And the President will see Putin during the G20 in Saint Petersburg, and we’ll see what progress we can make.
  4. BLANKFEIN: Secretary, all of us thank you for our service, but I think almost — maybe all of us are hungry for more.
  5. CLINTON: Well, I’m not sure about all of us, but thank you. (Event concluded at 9:15 P.M.)

 

38 CERTIFICATE OF REPORTER I, Patricia T. Morrison, Registered Professional Reporter and Notary Public for the State of South Carolina at Large, do hereby certify that the foregoing transcript is a true, accurate and complete record. I further certify that I am neither related to nor counsel for any party to the cause pending or interested in the events thereof. Witness my hand, I have hereunto affixed by official seal this 5th day of June 2013 at Charleston, Charleston County, South Carolina. ___________________________ Patricia T. Morrison Registered Professional Reporter My Commission Expires October 19, 2015

Advertisements

6 thoughts on “Hillary’s Goldman Sachs Speech Part Two…

      • Trump thinks she was pumped up at the last debate…….I thought they had her drugged to. I think that is the only way she can go public. I saw the short interview she gave on her plane when leaving the last debate……I thought she was having a slight seizure during it. I remember thinking that while watching; before anyone else said anything, the next day on Fox they said the same.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s