Image 01 Image 03

Leaked Hillary Speech: I Have a Dream … of Open Borders

Leaked Hillary Speech: I Have a Dream … of Open Borders

“My dream is a hemispheric common market, with open trade and open borders”

Yesterday, WikiLeaks released excerpts of speeches given by Hillary Clinton that were part of a batch of what it says were 2,060 emails hacked from an account belonging to Podesta.

The speech excerpts appear to have been gathered and emailed to a select group of people, including Podesta, in response to a request for “flags” in Hillary’s paid speeches compiled by Clinton campaign research director Tony Carrk.

Carrk highlights each section with the reason for its “flag”; you can tell what he wrote because it is either in all caps as a heading or has *asterisks* to denote it’s not from one of Hillary’s speeches.

Regarding the speeches themselves:  they contain some rather interesting revelations.  For example, she speaks openly about her desire to see open borders in the near future, about how Wall Street needs to fix Wall Street, about her positive view of the Keystone pipeline and trade, about her goal of instituting a Canadian-style “universal health care system,” and about her need to have “both a public and a private position” on policy issues.

From WikiLeaks:

*Hillary Clinton Said Her Dream Is A Hemispheric Common Market, With Open Trade And Open Markets. *“

My dream is a hemispheric common market, with open trade and open borders, some time in the future with energy that is as green and sustainable as we can get it, powering growth and opportunity for every person in the hemisphere.” [05162013 Remarks to Banco Itau.doc, p. 28]

Hillary explains the role Wall Street should play in fixing Wall Street.


*Clinton Said Financial Reform “Really Has To Come From The Industry Itself.” *“Remember what Teddy Roosevelt did. Yes, he took on what he saw as the excesses in the economy, but he also stood against the excesses in politics. He didn’t want to unleash a lot of nationalist, populistic reaction. He wanted to try to figure out how to get back into that balance that has served America so well over our entire nationhood. Today, there’s more that can and should be done that really has to come from the industry itself, and how we can strengthen our economy, create more jobs at a time where that’s increasingly challenging, to get back to Teddy Roosevelt’s square deal. And I really believe that our country and all of you are up to that job.” [Clinton Remarks to Deutsche Bank, 10/7/14]

*Speaking About The Importance Of Proper Regulation, Clinton Said “The People That Know The Industry Better Than Anybody Are The People Who Work In The Industry.”*

“I mean, it’s still happening, as you know. People are looking back and trying to, you know, get compensation for bad mortgages and all the rest of it in some of the agreements that are being reached. There’s nothing magic about regulations, too much is bad, too little is bad. How do you get to the golden key, how do we figure out what works? And the people that know the industry better than anybody are the people who work in the industry. And I think there has to be a recognition that, you know, there’s so much at stake now, I mean, the business has changed so much and decisions are made so quickly, in nano seconds basically. We spend trillions of dollars to travel around the world, but it’s in everybody’s interest that we have a better framework, and not just for the United States but for the entire world, in which to operate and trade.” [Goldman Sachs AIMS Alternative Investments Symposium, 10/24/13]

Although running as the protector of Obama’s legacy, one of Hillary’s speeches reveals that she diverges with him on issues like the Keystone Pipeline and trade.

*CLINTON REMARKS ARE PRO KEYSTONE AND PRO TRADE* *Clinton: “So I Think That Keystone Is A Contentious Issue, And Of Course It Is Important On Both Sides Of The Border For Different And Sometimes Opposing Reasons…” *“So I think that Keystone is a contentious issue, and of course it is important on both sides of the border for different and sometimes opposing reasons, but that is not our relationship. And I think our relationship will get deeper and stronger and put us in a position to really be global leaders in energy and climate change if we worked more closely together. And that’s what I would like to see us do.” [Remarks at tinePublic, 6/18/14]

Hillary expands on her ideas about adopting a Canadian model for single-payer health care.

*Clinton Cited President Johnson’s Success In Establishing Medicare And Medicaid And Said She Wanted To See The U.S. Have Universal Health Care Like In Canada.* “You know, on healthcare we are the prisoner of our past. The way we got to develop any kind of medical insurance program was during World War II when companies facing shortages of workers began to offer healthcare benefits as an inducement for employment. So from the early 1940s healthcare was seen as a privilege connected to employment. And after the war when soldiers came back and went back into the market there was a lot of competition, because the economy was so heated up. So that model continued. And then of course our large labor unions bargained for healthcare with the employers that their members worked for. So from the early 1940s until the early 1960s we did not have any Medicare, or our program for the poor called Medicaid until President Johnson was able to get both passed in 1965.

. . . .  We are still struggling. We’ve made a lot of progress. Ten million Americans now have insurance who didn’t have it before the Affordable Care Act, and that is a great step forward. (Applause.) And what we’re going to have to continue to do is monitor what the costs are and watch closely to see whether employers drop more people from insurance so that they go into what we call the health exchange system. So we’re really just at the beginning. But we do have Medicare for people over 65. And you couldn’t, I don’t think, take it away if you tried, because people are very satisfied with it, but we also have a lot of political and financial resistance to expanding that system to more people. So we’re in a learning period as we move forward with the implementation of the Affordable Care Act. And I’m hoping that whatever the shortfalls or the glitches have been, which in a big piece of legislation you’re going to have, those will be remedied and we can really take a hard look at what’s succeeding, fix what isn’t, and keep moving forward to get to affordable universal healthcare coverage like you have here in Canada. [Clinton Speech For tinePublic – Saskatoon, CA, 1/21/15]

She also explains her philosophy about the need to have a “public” and a “private” position on policy.


*Clinton: “But If Everybody’s Watching, You Know, All Of The Back Room Discussions And The Deals, You Know, Then People Get A Little Nervous, To Say The Least. So, You Need Both A Public And A Private Position.”*

CLINTON: You just have to sort of figure out how to — getting back to that word, “balance” — how to balance the public and the private efforts that are necessary to be successful, politically, and that’s not just a comment about today. That, I think, has probably been true for all of our history, and if you saw the Spielberg movie, Lincoln, and how he was maneuvering and working to get the 13th Amendment passed, and he called one of my favorite predecessors, Secretary Seward, who had been the governor and senator from New York, ran against Lincoln for president, and he told Seward, I need your help to get this done. And Seward called some of his lobbyist friends who knew how to make a deal, and they just kept going at it. I mean, politics is like sausage being made. It is unsavory, and it always has been that way, but we usually end up where we need to be. But if everybody’s watching, you know, all of the back room discussions and the deals, you know, then people get a little nervous, to say the least. So, you need both a public and a private position.

[Clinton Speech For National Multi-Housing Council, 4/24/13]

Trump is right when he says that without borders we have no country, and Hillary’s “dream” of open borders alone should disqualify her from becoming president.

Stay tuned: I’m sure we’ll have more on other information found in the 2,060 hacked Podesta emails.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


OnlyRightDissentAllowed | October 8, 2016 at 11:58 am

Open borders & free trade! It works for me. Why should we care about old, under-educated white guys who can’t adapt? We need new blood. We need people who will work hard, adapt and learn. That has always been the way in this country.

The only ones who can complain are the Native Americans.

Please, why should I subsidize Americans who can’t compete? I believe in cheap labor and inexpensive goods. I don’t want to pay more because the government imposes tariffs. That just raises my costs.

Besides, the jobs aren’t coming back. Robots are doing the bulk of the work in American factories. A few trained and educated workers service the robots. There are some menial jobs, but do white people want them? I can’t find any that will clean my home or my office.

Trump understands. That is why his shirts, ties, suits and other products were made in China.

    ORDA, is this tongue-in-cheek? I’m not sure given that you do lean left more than right. If you are being serious, let’s review, shall we, why labor costs are so high in the U. S. It’s not a long story, it’s rather short: Unions + Dems who tax anything that moves to pay for those who don’t (move or work) + imbalance in some trade deals struck with the goal of “spreading the wealth.” The end.

    Where are these old, under-educated white guys who can’t adapt? Do you mean those working in the coal industry that Dems have decimated on the altar of the AGW hoax? Or do you mean the good men who work in America’s factories, who work in construction, who break their backs day in and day out to provide for their families? Is that who you mean? Those good men who believe in a hard day’s honest work? Those men with callouses on their hands from working their farms, fishing, or tending their ranches to provide food for your family? Is that who you mean? Or do you mean the men who serve our country in the military? Or in law enforcement? Is that who you mean?

    Oh, my, the good old myth about work white people won’t do. Look in the yellow pages for housekeeping services, ORDA, you’ll find plenty that are run by and staffed with white people. Next time you’re at a restaurant, count how many white people are servers, hosts/hostesses, bus boys/gals, and bartenders. Next time you are at a farmers’s market, count how many “menial” people are there who grow food for a living and sell it in stands, next time you’re at a fair, a carnival, or any other similar venue, take note of the white “menial” people who run the stalls, who set up the rides and attractions. Next time you’re up when your paper is delivered, or you have a pizza brought to your door, note whether that “menial” person is a white guy.

    None of those people deserve their jobs because . . . white! Really? Are you suggesting that we need a minority underclass whose sole purpose in life is to serve old, over-educated white guys? Sure seems to be what you are saying.

      jack burns in reply to Fuzzy Slippers. | October 8, 2016 at 12:38 pm


      OnlyRightDissentAllowed in reply to Fuzzy Slippers. | October 8, 2016 at 1:24 pm

      FS, it is both tongue-in-cheek and serious. I do believe in free-trade and free-movement of labor to match free movement of capital.

      Do you know that Kentucky passed a law requiring the use of coal in a power plant in coal country because the local utility wanted to build a plant fired by cheaper natural? Is that a tax on the rate payers for the benefit of the coal miners? BTW, I have owned shares in fracking companies, but I sold them.

      Who paid the tax when Midwestern electrical generating plants, fueled by coal, built tall smokestacks so that the acid rain would fall in the pristine Adirondacks? Someone paid the tax. The tax was dead lakes and a damaged tourist industry. Was NY right to complain and get the EPA to force those plants to add scrubbers? Do you know that an exception was made for old plants that were scheduled to close in the near future? But instead of closing, those plants became more profitable and more valuable. So the owners started ‘fixing’ them piece by piece until they were 95% new. Finally, after a fierce lobbying fight, we got them shut down. We used dreaded regulation.

      Unions do raise costs and provide other protections for workers. At the height of the rust belt, there was a middle class because of unions. But it is complex. My best friend and I shared an apartment when he did his masters thesis on labor relations. He regaled me with his research on both the good of unions and the incredible corruption and waste. He even worked for the IEEE. The IEEE that had become a corrupt obstruction to new technologies and minorities getting into the industry. So there are 2 sides to the story.

      The coal industry is too busy cutting its own throat to need to be sacrificed on anyone’s alter. You do know about coal ash spills, black lung (which is back) and the raping of the countryside? You have heard of Don Blankenship?

      I know of a guy who was minding his own business on his ancestral land until a coal mine opened above him. Between the boulders raining down on his house, the poisoning of his well and the ceaseless trucks driving down a road not designed for them, he was forced out. BTW, those good mining jobs came about because of unions. Ever heard of Matewan? The company town disappeared because of laws and bloody battles.

      Where I live, there is no myth about the work white people will do. Years ago, I had one white maid who cleaned my house while she studied for her nursing degree. After she graduated, I never saw another. I did have a white friend who had a union job cleaning offices while he went to college. But none of his co-workers were white. Of course there are others. But the ‘myth’ comes from farmers in red states. The military is disproportionately colored.

      We are not over-taxed. But that topic is way too complicated to be reduced to a claim that taxes are the reason for high costs. There is waste, fraud and abuse. But some of that waste is in military procurement. Military procurement is one of the few stimulus programs the right will pay for. They don’t even want to pay for infrastructure. But $135 Million for a inferior J-35. No problem. Tanks the military doesn’t even want – No problem.

      Look, in a space like this it is impossible not to simplify and generalize. We both need to do it. Each of the topics you or I have mentioned could and does consume books and even whole fields of study. The problem is that there is no good faith. It has all become ideology.

        ORDA, did you really write: ” The military is disproportionately colored.” This is not only statistically and demonstrably false, but “colored”? REALLY?

        Look, it is pure insanity to expect “equal” numbers of black people to white people in ANY area considering that black people make up about 14% of the total U. S. population (some reports go as low as 12%) and whites over 60%.

        Now, if you are saying that more than the general population percentage of black people are in the military, that’s one thing (and it would be wrong, too, since black people make up about 13% of our military), but that’s not what you said or meant, right?

        This is the kind of thing that makes us give up even speaking to leftists (yeah, yeah, you’re not one, you claim). What’s the point? They have their own insane “truths” that they just make up out of fantasy and wishes and double-clicking of their heels.

          jack burns in reply to Fuzzy Slippers. | October 8, 2016 at 2:03 pm


          OnlyRightDissentAllowed in reply to Fuzzy Slippers. | October 8, 2016 at 2:40 pm

          Sorry if I was Politically Incorrect. Anyway, I never claimed it should be 50-40. But as a group there are a higher percentage in the military than in the population as a whole. If that is not true, then I guess a lot of sites reporting on this are wrong. In which case I would be wrong.

          ORDA, yes, you are wrong. The percentage of blacks in the military is about 13%; the percentage of blacks in the general population is about 14%. I fail to see how this is “disproportionate.” This is one of the stupid lies that the left peddles because it can (the premise being “if you say it long enough, people will believe it”). Another is that women are paid 76 cents on the male dollar (totally untrue, debunked roundly and forever, but still trotted out by progressives, including Ivanka Trump, as their special form of Gospel).

          If you can’t find the U. S. Census Bureau on your own device, here are a couple of links re: number of blacks in the military: and

          Another site that reports the number of black people in the military:

          As to why I focused on this, it was one of those things that stands out so much that it completely dwarfs all else.

          But to address at least some of your points: no, the middle class was not created by unions, that’s just ludicrous; closing coal plants that are “profitable” and “valuable” strikes me as singularly moronic; coal mining has not been proved to “poison” wells any more than fracking has (by Obama’s own researchers), but if you are interested in poisoned water, why not look at Flint, MI where the local Dem government’s greed and corruption poisoned children?; . . . do you really want me to address your every utterance?

          OnlyRightDissentAllowed in reply to Fuzzy Slippers. | October 8, 2016 at 2:42 pm

          BTW, is that all you care to note? Then you got me. Case closed.

          I would have thought the coal and union stuff would have been more interesting.

          OnlyRightDissentAllowed in reply to Fuzzy Slippers. | October 8, 2016 at 5:42 pm

          “no, the middle class was not created by unions, that’s just ludicrous” That’s it? It is ludicrous – end of story. Decent pay, the 8 hour day, 40 hour week, vacation and sick pay, medical insurance, retirement plan – unions had nothing to do with any of it. OK Settled. No facts necessary.

          I explained why the coal plants needed to be closed. They polluted. It cost too much to clean them up. Ever heard of externalities? Anyway I explained it once already. You want to deny it? OK Settled. That seems to be your MO when confronted by something that blows a hole in your world view.

          So it is simply not possible that the runoff from a strip mine couldn’t pollute a well. Is it possible that boulder came down and crushed part or his home or that trucks rumbled by 24/7 on a country road not designed for that amount and weight of traffic. OK, another issue settled. Kaboom!

          The lead in Flint, MI water happened after a REPUBLICAN Governor appointed a Receiver for Flint. When that receiver didn’t do what the Governor wanted, another Receiver ordered the Flint River used and that an additive that kept the lead from leaching out of the pipes to stop being used because he wanted to save money. That is an undisputed FACT. OK, dismiss that, too.

          No, you don’t have to address every utterance. Try the Flint MI While the complete facts are somewhat murky, a Republican Governor appointed a Receiver and a switch in water systems was pushed through with an interim switch to the Flint River. But additives to soften the water were not used to save money. Hence the lead corrosion. 4 Articles follow, but you can find ones where the 2nd Receiver denies everything. I guess I would, too.

          That there is an ongoing dispute and finger point doesn’t surprise me. But the Governor and 2 Receivers he appointed played a part. At best Snyder is guilty of crimes of omission. One could ask why the finances of the city were in bad shape to begin with. But the proximate cause of the problem was the decision to switch water sources and use the Flint river as a stop-gap. Whatever the Democrats might have done to get in the situation, a higher power made it worse.

Nothing to see here folks. Trump wanted to screw somebody in 2005. Stay focused on the big stuff.

No surprise here. And no surprise that this won’t run in any MSM publications.

Strangely it’s being drowned out by some video of Trump that wouldn’t be an issue if he wasn’t a piece of human garbage that has a ton of baggage for media fodder.

    AmericaBeautiful in reply to Zachary. | October 11, 2016 at 11:16 pm

    Oops, sorry, hit the up button by mistake.
    You are right that the globalist corrupt mainstream media, whose top executives are directly connected to the obaMao administration, will try to hide this information.
    And you are absolutely wrong in your criticism of Donald Trump. Who cares about words, when actions are what matters, especially right now.

Did she mention open elections. She must have forgot. Can’t have permanent Democratic co0ntrol without them. This is what’s at stake.

    OnlyRightDissentAllowed in reply to rayc. | October 8, 2016 at 1:30 pm

    Can’t have permanent republican control without extreme gerrymandering and voter suppression.

      you had some good points you post above but you screwed up in this one, the Democrats are the masters of voter suppression and gerrymandering. look at New York, Illinois, California for a few good examples.

      Please. Republicans control the federal legislative branch, most governorship, state legislatures. This is not gerrymandering, this is the will of the people. Democratic Party was effectively wiped out by 2014. So much so, that only two presidential candidates this year were the old shrew nobody likes and an old fart who wasn’t even a Democrat.
      …and then the morons had to go and nominate Trump.

        OnlyRightDissentAllowed in reply to edgeofthesandbox. | October 8, 2016 at 5:46 pm

        1.4 million more voters voted for democratic congressional candidates in 2014 than republican candidates. If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it is gerrymandering.

        The republicans don’t even deny it. Why do you?

Well, Trump said something bad. And that all that matter in this election, yes? Otherwise the proles might get all uppity, and, you know, hold Democrats accountable (gasp!).

Too bad she’s running unopposed.

Here’s what’s funny…

Hellary is a lying liar who lies. We know that. What does she say that anyone can take at face value?

Would Canada be interested in “open borders”? No.

Would Mexico be interested in “open borders” with its neighbors to the Sud? No.

Could any POTUS sell “open borders” to the American people? No.

Does anyone here know WTF “open trade” even means? No.

    Trudeau is actually an open borders guy (he’s a leftist, so it’s not surprising). Mexico wants open borders . . . the kind that allow only one-way traffic. No POTUS can sell open borders to the American people, but that won’t stop them (one might argue that we have, essentially, open borders now). They do all sorts of things by pen and phone that we’d never ever agree to. I know what “open trade” means, so call on me! me!

      Ragspierre in reply to Fuzzy Slippers. | October 8, 2016 at 2:44 pm

      Trudeau is not Canada.

      Mexico does not want open borders…except to El Norte. They’re VERY jealous of their territory otherwise.

      What do you think “open trade” means?

        No, but they voted for Trudeau (more’s the pity).

        On Wall Street, “open trade” is a just a stock or whatever transaction that is still “open” (it hasn’t been sold or finalized in some way, so it’s still open).

        In geo-political terms, the meaning shifts a great deal, but essentially “open trade” means that trade between countries that is unrestricted (via taxation, limits, levies, etc.).

        It is also a term used synonymously with “fair trade,” a Soros-pushed concept you don’t believe Trump understands (I still maintain that he does). In the “fair trade” sense, it typically encompasses, as does the Hillary-Soros dream, spreading of the wealth.

        On an even larger scale, “open trade” means actually “assigning” certain parts of the world with their “job” in the global economy and then free-sourcing their output in exchange for the output (trade) of other countries or regions “assigned” other “jobs.” Collectivism on the largest scale.

        In rhetorical terms, it’s intended to connote a positive thing: “open” is good; “closed” is bad. Kind of like “pro-choice” rather than “pro-abortion” or “pro-infanticide.”

        I hope I got it right, Rags. 🙂

        Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | October 8, 2016 at 3:16 pm

        Well, you kinda prove my point about WTF she meant by “open trade”.

        We would have to assign a meaning that isn’t obvious from the blurb we have.

        I understand the Collectivist “fair trade” BS, as in “fair trade coffee” where idiots pay a premium over the market for the virtue signaling they get out of the deal. But I think Hellary is capable of saying that, if that’s what she means.

        I’d personally LOVE to see “open trade” in the sense that individuals and their businesses were free to trade with others pretty much anywhere on terms they agree to, subject to compliance with health and safety regulations and not one damned thing more. Like a great big eBay.


      the US needs to hurry up and finish I-69, the joke was it was meant to be the way for the illegals to get to Canada quickly, see if Trudeau is really open borders after it is finished.

Hilliary: “I have a dream…”

Why do her dreams mean nightmares for us?

So when Hillary’s speeches on what she does in her professional life are revealed, the Clinton Campaign promptly dishes out some of the dirt it’s been saving up in order for the mainstream media to have something else to run with.

No big surprise here, other than the timing. I really expected the MSM to cover for Hillary and her multi-million dollar speech chain until after the election, and I expected all of the dirt to be dumped on Trump the day after Halloween. Guess the ghouls are out early.

Sorry Fuzzy she doesn’t have to dream. It’s mostly here. If she wins it will be carved in stone.

So sometime soon Costa Rica and Guatemala will probably be virtually empty, all of the folks “fleeing gang violence” having set up shop in LA and the Southwest. Might be time to head south, this country is starting to show signs of serious structural fatigue.