I'm referring to legal corruption... Super-PACs, getting overpaid for Wall Street speeches, etc etc. Corruption of political mission to sell out for money to tje rixh and corporations, legal or not.
Do you think she should have turned down the speeches? I've never understood this criticism. Like who would turn down 6 figures to give a speech?
I would definitely not give paid speeches to Goldman Sachs if I were in her position, as I would risk indebting myself to Goldman Sachs by doing so, and find myself under pressure to repay that debt through my actions in public office. This would conflict with my duty as an officeholder to make impartial decisions, rather than decisions that are partial towards Goldman Sachs.
Why would you be indebted to them? You gave them a speech in return for money.
People are so damn thick about this sometimes.
Why do you think members of Congress are not allowed to get paid for speeches? The answer is that they would be paid not for their speeches
per se, but rather for political influence, with the speeches serving as a pretext for the payment. Hillary Clinton, as someone who was looking to run for President, was also in a position to sell political influence, but she was not restrained by the same rules. Since Goldman Sachs is known for buying political influence, having spent a total of $6.4M in lobbying (i.e. influencing politicians) in 2019 and 2020, it is highly likely that the purpose of Hillary Clinton collecting speaking fees from them was to sell political influence.
