What 33,000 pages of leaked emails teach us about Hillary Clinton

Summary

The transcript discusses the 2016 Wikileaks release of emails from John Podesta, Hillary Clinton's campaign chair, and highlights how these revelations have raised concerns, particularly among liberals. While the emails may not change voting intentions, they emphasize Clinton's perceived closeness to Wall Street and financial donors, fueling suspicions about her policies. It also touches on Clinton's ties to the Clinton Foundation and potential conflicts of interest. The debates within her campaign regarding healthcare policies and balancing political and policy considerations are also showcased.

Takeaways

• 📧 Wikileaks released over 33,000 pages of emails from John Podesta, Hillary Clinton’s campaign chair, in October 2016.
• 🌍 The Clinton campaign refused to authenticate the emails, stating that Russia was likely behind the hacking.
• 🔍 There were no bombshell revelations, and the emails were unlikely to sway voters who were already decided.
• 💼 Concerns were raised among liberals that Hillary Clinton might be too close to Wall Street bankers.
• 💬 Bernie Sanders emphasized the importance of confronting Wall Street rather than accepting their money.
• 🏦 Clinton’s speeches to Goldman Sachs became a focal point, raising questions about her ties to Wall Street.
• 🤔 The campaign did internal research to find damaging information from Clinton's speeches in case they were leaked.
• 💸 Emails revealed Clinton agreed to attend a Moroccan event in exchange for a $12 million donation to the Clinton Foundation.
• 🏥 Clinton’s team was divided over the 'Cadillac Tax,' with political aides wanting to avoid it and policy aides supporting it.
• 👔 The Republican Party also has extensive ties to big money donors, making their criticism of Clinton over these emails somewhat ironic.

Q & A

What was the key content of the Wikileaks release in October 2016?

Wikileaks released over 33,000 pages of emails from John Podesta, Hillary Clinton’s campaign chair. These emails provided insights into Clinton’s campaign strategy, interactions with Wall Street, and the Clinton Foundation.

How did the Clinton campaign respond to the Wikileaks email release?

The Clinton campaign refused to authenticate the individual emails and claimed that the Russian government appeared to be behind the hack.

Did the email release change voter opinions about Hillary Clinton?

The emails didn’t seem to contain any bombshells that would significantly change voters' opinions. People who planned to vote for Clinton were likely to continue doing so, and those who weren’t were unlikely to change their minds.

Why were liberals concerned about the emails released by Wikileaks?

Some liberals feared that the emails confirmed their concerns that Clinton was too close to Wall Street and big bankers, which was a key issue for the left wing of the Democratic party.

What was revealed about Hillary Clinton's speeches to Goldman Sachs in the emails?

The emails revealed that Clinton said Dodd-Frank, the regulation meant to rein in Wall Street, was 'passed for political reasons.' This raised concerns about her closeness to financial institutions.

How did the Clinton campaign internally handle concerns about Wall Street connections?

Emails showed Clinton’s aides internally debated how to ensure that her perceived tone-deafness toward Wall Street didn’t harm her public image. One specific example involved concerns over Bill Clinton planning a speech at Morgan Stanley after the campaign launched.

How does Clinton's relationship with Wall Street compare to Donald Trump’s, according to the transcript?

While Clinton’s bank regulation platform was described as much tougher than Trump’s, her close ties to Wall Street were seen as problematic by the left wing of her party.

What controversy was connected to Clinton’s trip to Morocco?

The emails revealed that Clinton agreed to attend an event in Morocco in exchange for a $12 million donation to the Clinton Global Initiative. Although she was not Secretary of State at the time, it raised concerns about the influence of large donors.

What was the internal debate in Clinton’s team about the Cadillac Tax?

Clinton’s political aides wanted her to back away from supporting the Cadillac Tax to win union endorsements, while her policy aides believed the tax was the right policy. The division highlighted the balancing act between good policy and political considerations.

What does the transcript suggest about the influence of donors on the Clinton Foundation?

Although the Clinton Foundation did significant charitable work, the emails reinforced fears from some Democrats that donors may have been contributing in hopes of currying favor with a potential Clinton White House.

Outlines

00:00

📰 Wikileaks and the Clinton Campaign

In October 2016, Wikileaks released 33,000 pages of emails from John Podesta, Hillary Clinton's campaign chair. The Clinton campaign refused to authenticate these emails, attributing the hack to Russian interference. The emails do not reveal any bombshells, meaning voters likely will not change their support based on this leak. However, many liberals, particularly those concerned with Clinton's ties to Wall Street, might find the content troubling, fearing that she is too close to big banks.

💼 Clinton's Wall Street Connections and Bernie Sanders' Criticism

Bernie Sanders previously criticized Clinton for her connections with Wall Street, stating that politicians should oppose big financial institutions rather than take their money. Clinton’s failure to release transcripts of her speeches to Goldman Sachs intensified this criticism. Wikileaks revealed that Clinton’s campaign performed internal opposition research to gauge potential backlash from these speeches. While her Wall Street regulation platform is tougher than Donald Trump’s, the left wing of the party remains wary of her ties to financial institutions.

🔍 Bill Clinton’s Planned Speech Sparks Concern

Internal campaign emails show concern over Bill Clinton’s plan to give a speech at Morgan Stanley shortly after Hillary Clinton’s campaign launched. While Clinton's team advised against the speech, Hillary appeared unfazed by the potential negative optics. Clinton's longstanding indifference to the political risks of being seen as too close to Wall Street is highlighted, yet her supporters might not view this as problematic, believing she can engage with these institutions without compromising her values.

🏛️ Comparisons Between Clinton and Obama

Critics of Hillary Clinton’s connections to Wall Street should also consider Barack Obama, whose administration shared similar financial ties. Republican criticism of Clinton is seen as hypocritical given the party's close ties to wealthy donors. Additionally, while emails suggest Clinton agreed to attend a Clinton Global Initiative event in Morocco in exchange for a $12 million donation, there is no evidence of wrongdoing or a quid pro quo, despite concerns about the optics of such arrangements.

💸 Clinton Foundation’s Role in Fundraising and Influence

While the Clinton Foundation has done significant humanitarian work globally, concerns persist about its donors' motivations, especially among left-wing Democrats. Some fear that large donations to the foundation were an attempt to gain favor with a potential Clinton White House. This adds to the existing suspicions about Clinton’s ties to wealthy individuals and institutions, reinforcing anxieties about her closeness to big money interests.

💡 Internal Debates on the Cadillac Tax

The leaked emails reveal internal disagreements within Clinton’s team regarding the Cadillac Tax, which imposes higher taxes on luxury healthcare plans. Her political aides pushed to distance her from the tax to gain union endorsements for the Democratic primary, while her policy advisers argued in favor of it. This highlights the broader balancing act all politicians face between policy and political considerations. The emails offer a rare, unvarnished glimpse into these sometimes messy deliberations.

Keywords

💡Wikileaks

Wikileaks is a platform that releases classified or sensitive information, often provided by whistleblowers. In the script, Wikileaks is mentioned for its 2016 release of over 33,000 pages of emails from John Podesta, Hillary Clinton’s campaign chair. The release of these emails sparked political controversy, raising concerns about Clinton's ties to Wall Street and her transparency.

💡John Podesta

John Podesta was the chair of Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign. His emails were hacked and released by Wikileaks, which became a central issue in the campaign. The script highlights how these leaked emails didn’t contain major 'bombshells,' but they contributed to ongoing concerns among liberals about Clinton's closeness to Wall Street.

💡Wall Street

Wall Street refers to the financial sector, specifically large banks and investment firms. In the script, there are concerns that Hillary Clinton is too closely aligned with Wall Street due to her speeches to banks like Goldman Sachs. This issue caused tension within the Democratic Party, especially among its progressive wing, which sees financial ties as compromising political integrity.

💡Goldman Sachs speeches

Hillary Clinton’s paid speeches to Goldman Sachs, a major financial institution, are referenced in the emails. Clinton faced criticism for not releasing the transcripts of these speeches, which fueled suspicion that she was too close to Wall Street interests. This became a key talking point for her critics, especially among progressives.

💡Dodd-Frank

Dodd-Frank is a U.S. law enacted after the 2008 financial crisis to regulate banks and prevent future crises. Clinton's emails included a comment that Dodd-Frank was passed for 'political reasons,' which raised concerns among some liberals that she might be too lenient toward Wall Street. The script uses this to illustrate the tension between Clinton’s campaign rhetoric and her perceived alliances.

💡Cadillac Tax

The Cadillac Tax is a tax on high-cost, luxury healthcare plans. The leaked emails reveal internal debate within Clinton's team about whether to support this tax. Her political aides wanted to oppose it to gain union support, while her policy aides thought it was a necessary reform. This internal conflict highlights the balancing act between policy and political considerations in campaigns.

💡Clinton Foundation

The Clinton Foundation is a charitable organization founded by Bill and Hillary Clinton. While it has done significant humanitarian work, the script mentions concerns that donations to the foundation were sometimes made by foreign governments and wealthy individuals seeking favor. An example is a $12 million donation from Morocco, which raised suspicions about the influence of money in Clinton’s political dealings.

💡Russian interference

Russian interference refers to the involvement of the Russian government in the hacking and release of emails during the 2016 U.S. presidential election. Clinton’s campaign suggested that Russia was behind the hacking of John Podesta's emails, although they did not authenticate the emails themselves. This claim links the email controversy to broader issues of foreign interference in American politics.

💡Progressive wing

The progressive wing of the Democratic Party, often represented by politicians like Bernie Sanders, is characterized by its focus on economic inequality and resistance to corporate influence. The script highlights how this faction viewed Clinton's ties to Wall Street with suspicion, fearing that her financial relationships compromised her ability to regulate the banking sector and serve the public interest.

💡Quid pro quo

Quid pro quo means 'something for something,' often referring to the exchange of favors, especially in politics. The script mentions concerns that Clinton’s agreement to meet with foreign officials, such as in Morocco, after donations to the Clinton Foundation could be perceived as a quid pro quo, though it is noted that there is no evidence of such an exchange involving government favors.

Highlights

In October 2016, Wikileaks released over 33,000 pages of emails from John Podesta, Hillary Clinton’s campaign chair.

The Clinton campaign refused to authenticate the emails, citing the likely involvement of the Russian government.

The leaked emails contain no bombshells likely to change voters' opinions on Clinton.

Liberals concerned about Clinton’s close ties to Wall Street may be further worried by these emails.

Bernie Sanders argued that the role of the Democratic Party is to challenge Wall Street, not take its money.

Clinton has been criticized for not releasing the transcripts of her speeches to Goldman Sachs.

Clinton's comments in the leaked emails suggest that Dodd-Frank, a key piece of financial reform, was passed for political reasons.

The emails show Clinton’s aides worried about her being perceived as too close to Wall Street.

There were internal debates within the campaign about Bill Clinton speaking at Morgan Stanley shortly after Hillary’s campaign launch.

Clinton did not appear to fully grasp or care about the political ramifications of being close to Wall Street.

Republicans criticizing Clinton's ties to big money donors is seen as hypocritical given their own extensive connections.

Emails revealed Clinton agreed to attend an event in Morocco in exchange for a $12 million donation to the Clinton Global Initiative.

While there is no evidence of a quid pro quo, the donation raised concerns about preferential treatment for wealthy donors.

Clinton's internal team was divided over the Cadillac Tax, a policy impacting luxury healthcare plans, with political and policy aides at odds.

The leaked emails provide a behind-the-scenes look at how political decisions are often made by weighing policy against political considerations.

Transcripts

In October 2016, Wikileaks released over 33,000 pages of emails from John Podesta, Hillary

Clinton’s campaign chair.

The Clinton campaign has refused to authenticate individual emails provided by wikileaks, instead,

saying correctly that the Russian government appears to be behind the attack.

There are no bombshells in these emails.

If you were planning on voting for Hillary Clinton, you’re probably still going to

do so, and if you weren’t planning on voting for Clinton, you probably won’t.

That said, I think these emails will be really concerning to a lot of liberals who fear and

have already feared that Clinton is too close to bankers on Wall Street.

Sanders: Our job is to take on Wall Street, not to take their money

Bash: Secretary Clinton, the question was about the transcripts of the speeches to Goldman

Sachs.

Why not release them?

One of the ironies of this story is that we know about these emails at all because the

campaign itself did self-opposition research to find what in her Goldman Sachs speeches

could prove damaging should they leak.

Among the stuff that’s gotten the most attention is Clinton saying that Dodd-Frank, Obama’s

signature initiative to reign in Wall Street, was, quote, “passed for political reasons.”

that doesn’t mean necessarily that her bank regulation platform is any weaker than Donald

Trump’s. It’s not, it’s much tougher.

But for the left wing of the party, that sees Clinton as already too close to a lot of these

interests, this is just going to confirm those suspicions.

You can see aides in the emails, internally debating how to make sure that her apparent tone deafness

on Wall Street didn’t seep out into the public.

One example that really drives this home is that right after the campaign launched, Bill

Clinton was planning on giving a speech at Morgan Stanley, and Clinton’s aides freaked

out about this.

They said this is something we shouldn’t do and Hillary herself appeared to be okay

with it.

Now, again, if you are a Clinton fan, you probably don’t think that’s a big deal,

you probably think that Clinton and her husband can march into Wall Street, say what they

need to say, collect the money, and not change their viewpoints at all.

I have never, ever been influenced in a view or a vote

by anyone who has given me any kind of funding.

But it does speak to, I think, something that we’ve long suspected, which is that Hillary

herself doesn’t really see the political ramifications for appearing close to Wall Street, or doesn’t care.

Another piece of context that people really should keep in mind is that if you’re going

to hold Clinton herself to blame for a lot of this stuff, you also have to find fault

with Obama.

Similarly, Republicans crying foul over this is pretty rich.

The Republican party has curried extensive ties with big money donors, and for years

maintained that it wasn’t influencing their politicians.

The emails also show that Clinton agreed to go to Morocco in exchange for a $12 million

donation to the Clinton Global Initiative.

Now, Clinton herself wasn’t Secretary of State at this time.

There’s no reason to believe that there was a quid pro quo in which she promised to

do a government favor in exchange for something that the Moroccan government wanted.

But it does, again, add to this idea that Clinton was more likely to meet with people

who gave lots of money to her husband’s private charity.

We should be very clear, the Clinton Foundation has done genuinely live-saving work all over

the world.

That said, it certainly won’t erase fears from the left wing of the Democratic party

that the reason people were giving to the foundation was to curry favor with a potential

Clinton white house.

One of the interesting debates from the emails has to do with the Cadillac Tax, which taxes

luxury healthcare plans at a higher rate than other plans.

You can see from the internal debates in the emails that the Cadillac Tax sharply divided

Clinton’s team.

On the one hand you had her political aides, which were strongly urging her to back away

from the Cadillac Tax in order to win the endorsement of unions, who she needed in the

Democratic primary.

On the other hand, her policy aides clearly thought that this was the right agenda, and

urged her to support it.

This is how all politicians operate.

They take a policy position that they think is good, and they weigh it against the political

considerations.

That said, getting a chance to see how that works yourself can sometimes be an ugly sight.