$153 million in Bill and Hillary Clinton speaking fees, documented

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by Tom Joad

Do you have any proof of that?

Because there is plenty of proof that Hillary has been bought and paid for.

Not really. There's proof she and Bill took money for speeches. Even your girl $arah Palin takes $100K and Rudy Guiliani makes $270K per speech.

http://www.salon.com/2013/07/17/the_...avies_partner/

For that matter, Hillary gets $200k per speech, but The Donald gets $1.5 million per speech. Does that mean he's 7.5X more bought and sold than Hillary?

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/washi...?id=24551590#1

[Tom Joad]

Originally Posted by finnbow

Not really. There's proof she and Bill took money for speeches. Even your girl $arah Palin takes $100K and Rudy Guiliani makes $270K per speech.

Dude, I despise Republicans as much as I do the Clintonistas.

But I understand your need to misrepresent me like that as you candidate is indefensible on her own.

Originally Posted by finnbow

but The Donald gets $1.5 million per speech

Really?

I am unaware of that.

Can you document it?

[nailer]

Originally Posted by finnbow

Not really. There's proof she and Bill took money for speeches. Even your girl $arah Palin takes $100K and Rudy Guiliani makes $270K per speech.

http://www.salon.com/2013/07/17/the_...avies_partner/

For that matter, Hillary gets $200k per speech, but The Donald gets $1.5 million per speech. Does that mean he's 7.5X more bought and sold than Hillary?

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/washi...?id=24551590#1

Of course not. “The Donald earned a staggering $1.5 million per speech at The Learning Annex’s ‘real estate wealth expos’ in 2006 and 2007,” according to Forbes. “Trump appeared at 17 seminars and collected this fee for each one.”

[Tom Joad]

Originally Posted by nailer

Of course not. “The Donald earned a staggering $1.5 million per speech at The Learning Annex’s ‘real estate wealth expos’ in 2006 and 2007,” according to Forbes. “Trump appeared at 17 seminars and collected this fee for each one.”

Is that the same thing as what the Clinton's did?

If it is, I don't see it.

Trump wasn't even a political figure back then.

How could there be some expectation that in return for these fees he was going to someday get himself elected and do favors in return?

And who pays for these fees at seminars like this?

Gullible schmucks that pay big bucks to listen to some huckster tell them they too can make all their dreams come true, all they gotta do is stand is front of the mirror in the morning and tell themselves they're awesome.

It's just one of those many scams based on P.T. Barnum's observation that '"there's a sucker born every minute." Yeah, it's sleazy, but it's not the same as the Political "Pay to Play" game.

[finnbow]

At least the people willingly paid to hear the Clintons speak. Trump simply rips people off and declares bankruptcy.

[Tom Joad]

Originally Posted by finnbow

At least the people willingly paid to hear the Clintons speak.

Of course they paid willingly.

They are getting political favors from the Clintons worth far more than what they are paying them. It's a bargain for them.

[Oerets]

We at least have figures from one candidate on their earnings.

Barney

[barbara]

And Donald is not beholden to Wall Street...?

http://www.npr.org/2016/08/05/488825...nomic-advisors

[nailer]

Originally Posted by barbara

And Donald is not beholden to Wall Street...?

http://www.npr.org/2016/08/05/488825...nomic-advisors

Those advisors might just be beholden to The Donald if he wins.

[nailer]

Way back when you told me you're the funniest man I've never met.