By: NYT Editorial Board
Sunday, November 15, 2015
"Hillary Clinton should have seen that Wall Street shot coming. Instead, she compounded the damage.
“The former secretary of state was off to a sound outing in Saturday night’s debate against Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont and former Gov. Martin O’Malley of Maryland. Friday’s terrorist attacks in Paris dominated at first, allowing her to highlight her superior experience in world affairs. But it was those attacks that made her badly muffed response to questions about her fealty to Wall Street all the more jarring…
“Predictably, Twitter exploded with demands to know what campaign donations from big banks had to do with New York’s recovery from 9/11.
“Answer: little to nothing. Since 2001, she and Bill Clinton have earned more than $125 million for speeches, many of the most lucrative made before financial groups. That does not account for the millions given directly to her campaign, and to political action committees backing her. Nearly 15 years after the 2001 attacks, Mrs. Clinton was earning more than $200,000 for a 20-minute speech. Most of those took place behind guarded doors. But one can guess that she and the financial executives were not still talking about 9/11...
“Her effort to tug on Americans’ heartstrings instead of explaining her Wall Street ties — on a day that the scars of 9/11 were exposed anew — was at best botched rhetoric. At worst it was the type of cynical move that Mrs. Clinton would have condemned in Republicans.
“She should make a fast, thorough effort to explain herself by providing a detailed plan for how she would promote measures protecting middle-class Americans from another financial crisis.”
Read the full editorial here.
Elections Hillary Clinton