It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

WATCH: Full Secret Video of Private Romney Fundraiser

page: 1
6

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 04:32 PM
link   
Link

Well here we go. Time to see some context of the full Romney speech from the private fundraiser.
I am cringing a little because I have a feeling this will be bad.

One of my friends, who is heavily drinking the republican kool-aid, agrees that Romney is done. Stick a fork in him done. After watching the video.
The full video is gonna put some serious brakes on his presidential campaign.


On Monday and Tuesday Mother Jones published exclusive video that captured Mitt Romney speaking to donors at a May 17 fundraiser, which was held at the home of private equity mogul Mark Leder. Responding to a question about the "Palestinian problem," Romney said peace in the Middle East is not possible and a Palestinian state is not feasible, telling donors that Palestinians have "no interest whatsoever in establishing peace and that the pathway to peace is almost unthinkable to accomplish." At another point, the GOP presidential nominee told attendees of this $50,000-a-plate dinner that 47 percent of Americans—those who back President Obama—are "victims" who are "dependent upon government" and "pay no income tax." He noted: "My job is not to worry about those people. I'll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives." These comments set off a media firestorm and generated headlines around the world.


Part I



Part II


edit on 18-9-2012 by grey580 because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 04:42 PM
link   
Sorry, but I won't watch it. it supports the person who recorded it breaking people's rights to privacy. If this were a public speech, it'd be different, but this was a private speech and I support the right to privacy.

I'm really sick and tired of these people who think that their right to know supersedes anybody else's right to privacy.

There is no such thing as the right to know.

And if it were me I'd personally launch a civil suit for any reason I can think of, including using my image without permission.

Romney may be a deplorable person, but EVERYBODY has the right to privacy.

And they should fine people who violate it like this a quarter of a million dollars, at least.



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 04:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by EvilSadamClone

There is no such thing as the right to know.



Yes there is if someone is going for president.



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 04:45 PM
link   
I love how he actually asked for the full video to be released. Dude, you couldn't have said anything before that that could've put it into context.

Not to mention this segment
edit on 18-9-2012 by Ghost375 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 04:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by EvilSadamClone
Sorry, but I won't watch it. it supports the person who recorded it breaking people's rights to privacy. If this were a public speech, it'd be different, but this was a private speech and I support the right to privacy.

I'm really sick and tired of these people who think that their right to know supersedes anybody else's right to privacy.

There is no such thing as the right to know.





Normally, I would agree with you.

But I think in a case like this, where a person is running for an elected office (particularly the most important elected position in arguably the entire world), and they make blanket statements about not caring for almost half the country's population, we deserve to know.

The things politicians say in public can never be trusted. The only way we can truly know what's on their mind is to judge what they say when they don't think anyone is listening. It would be really interesting to hear some candid Obama conversations as well.



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 04:51 PM
link   
reply to post by flexy123
 


No, there isn't. Even those guys have a right to privacy. There is no such thing that says any presidential candidate must give up their right to privacy when running. It's just a bs excuse.

Unless they VOLUNTARILY wave that right and promise to be transparent.



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 04:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by EvilSadamClone
reply to post by flexy123
 


There is no such thing that says any presidential candidate has a right to privacy when running.



Fixed for ya!



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 04:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by EvilSadamClone
Sorry, but I won't watch it. it supports the person who recorded it breaking people's rights to privacy. If this were a public speech, it'd be different, but this was a private speech and I support the right to privacy.

I'm really sick and tired of these people who think that their right to know supersedes anybody else's right to privacy.


I agree with you. Still, since it's already out there, and the election is coming, this might help people to better understand Romney. You see, a few weeks ago, before the RNC convention, it was a common complaint that people didn't really know Romney all that well. Obama had his own open mic moment, and boy did anyone care to protect his privacy. At least it's a two-way street.

EDIT to add: I won't watch much of these videos after all, because they make me cringe. Romney talking about foreign policy? Boy he does sound like a moron. Phew.

edit on 18-9-2012 by buddhasystem because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 05:01 PM
link   
reply to post by EvilSadamClone
 


So if a video emerged of the Illuminati plotting and scheming and secretly running the country, you wouldn't watch it because their privacy was violated?

(Please note this is not an accusation about Romney, I am just using it as an unrelated example.)



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 05:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by EvilSadamClone
reply to post by flexy123
 


No, there isn't. Even those guys have a right to privacy. There is no such thing that says any presidential candidate must give up their right to privacy when running. It's just a bs excuse.

Unless they VOLUNTARILY wave that right and promise to be transparent.



Here I thought violating privacy was exactly what the American government was doing to its own people without their consent. I personally think its perfect, for people to see the ugliness behind the political figure mask



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 05:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by EvilSadamClone
Sorry, but I won't watch it. it supports the person who recorded it breaking people's rights to privacy. If this were a public speech, it'd be different, but this was a private speech and I support the right to privacy.

I'm really sick and tired of these people who think that their right to know supersedes anybody else's right to privacy.

There is no such thing as the right to know.

And if it were me I'd personally launch a civil suit for any reason I can think of, including using my image without permission.

Romney may be a deplorable person, but EVERYBODY has the right to privacy.

And they should fine people who violate it like this a quarter of a million dollars, at least.



No.

Absolutely 100% no.

This footage is from a fundraiser held so that Romney could prove to the super-rich that he will cater to their every whim if he becomes president. The public have a right to know that he does not care about them, that he would happily sell them down the river if he thought it could make him or one of his rich friends a buck. We the people have a right to know what these candidates policies actually are, instead of just being fed the pretty lies and the spin. The voting public have a right to know when candidates are corrupt. We have a right to base our vote on facts, not campaign fiction.

This is essentially someone blowing the whistle on corruption. Good for them. If Romney was a company and not a candidate, that person would have a theoretical reward waiting for them somewhere, and in most states pretty thick legal protection.

If it were a private person in their private home saying private things to their private family, then yes. Right to privacy, no problem, lawsuit, etc, good deal go get 'em. But this is saying sneaky things to rich people in somebody else's private home to some secret cronies who paid secret crony money to be there. Comparing this crap to a private citizen's right to privacy is like comparing apples to oranges, or to make the disparateness even more obvious, apples to baby gerbils, because the same thing they just simply ain't.

ETA: the right to privacy evaporates when the things discussed and planned in private could conceivably affect people not privy to them. There are laws and legal precedents which establish this. One that comes to mind is the legal maneuvering and conspiracy laws used against the Chicago Seven in the 1960s. Another is that a psychiatrist or psychologist can legally breach doctor-patient confidentiality if they believe their patient poses a real threat to others. Another few are the recent whistle-blower protection laws alluded to earlier in my post. Also, Watergate whut? Any rate, those are the first just off the top of my head, and I am sure there are other precedents I'm not aware of.


Also this, from the post below me, should pretty much cover it, too:


Originally posted by grey580
reply to post by EvilSadamClone
 


Right to privacy usually only applies when there is an expectation of privacy.

If you're inviting people to a fundraiser to hear you speak on purpose.
How much privacy are you allowed?

edit on 18-9-2012 by lycosa because: so many edits, so little time.



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 05:28 PM
link   
reply to post by EvilSadamClone
 


Right to privacy usually only applies when there is an expectation of privacy.

If you're inviting people to a fundraiser to hear you speak on purpose.
How much privacy are you allowed?

IMO Romney should of searched and put up signs indicating no filming allowed. Then we can talk about privacy.



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 05:33 PM
link   
That video only proves that Mr. Romney needs better security. I'd be more interested in seeing Mr. Obama's "behind closed doors" meetings. Hell, though I haven't seen any, he even promised "transparency". It seems we know much, much, more about Mr. Romney than we do our "Dear Leader".

See ya,
Milt



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 05:37 PM
link   
"I saw Dr. Kissinger in New York..." How telling.

"I do about 2 or 3 events like this a day." I'm sure you do, Mittens. I'm sure you do. "I only get asked 1 or 2 foreign policy questions."

That's because the people who pay $50,000 for a meal are not worried about what's going on across the ocean. All they know is they're getting rich off of whatever it is.

"I don't have a map here to look at the geography.."

We are so dumb to be allowing these 2 stooges to run for President. It makes me sick our choices are between these a-holes. It angers me to no end this has what it's become. Listen to Romney casually speak, he just does not sound Presidential, whatever that means, I don't really know, but he doesn't sound like it. He sounds like someone running for local office. I do not trust this man to make important decisions.

This is off-topic and also wishful thinking, but I hope someone is able to sneak video of next years Bilderburg Meeting. That would be aawwweeesssommmeee.
edit on 18-9-2012 by PatriotGames2 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 05:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by BenReclused
That video only proves that Mr. Romney needs better security. I'd be more interested in seeing Mr. Obama's "behind closed doors" meetings.


I think it's an excellent idea, to start frisking wealthy donors and their staff. Mr.Romney should definitely adopt this practice. Ban cellphones in the house. Ration toilet paper, etc. Who knows, maybe someone will want to take notes?



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 07:11 PM
link   
reply to post by repressed
 


Not really.

I've seen some of those videos.

Nobody can do anything about it.

It's pretty much useless to watch those kinds of videos.



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 08:13 PM
link   
reply to post by buddhasystem
 


frisking wealthy donors and their staff. Mr.Romney should definitely adopt this practice. Ban cellphones in the house. Ration toilet paper, etc. Who knows, maybe someone will want to take notes?

If that's why we know so little about what Mr. Obama says at his private fundraisers, it works pretty damn well!

See ya,
Milt



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 09:10 PM
link   
They said they was going to release the full video, and they lied again.
Both videos were most likely around 30 minutes.
But they cut the first one off right in the middle of the comment that is suppose to be most inflaming.

Let, me guess, they won’t release the rest of his statement when he finishes explaining his position…… about the 47, or what ever percent. Who would of thunk. Classic “taking things out of context”


All in all, I don’t see where this hurts, him. He it telling the truth. I, myself, found watching the video to be extremely reassuring. Finally someone that has his head on straight, and has a realistic view of what is happening in the world.

Truth to power. The people in power hate it with a passion, but the truth isn’t suppose to be considerate. Because the truth does not change depending on how you feel.

I didn’t see anything that looked like him saying he was going to bow to anyone's whim, like another poster stated. Just the opposite actually, he talked a lot about getting the conditions right to allow small and large business to grow. From the little man to the large one.

As some undecided people the local station interviewed who actually watched the whole thing. They said they agreed with the positions he stated.. This is a plus, not a negative.

Like one of my relatives that said he wasn’t going to vote for any one of the worthless idots. He seen the video and just got off the phone with me while proudly proclaiming “Finally someone who is telling like it is.” I would say that that video probably just earned Romney another vote.

edit on 18-9-2012 by Mr Tranny because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 19 2012 @ 07:56 AM
link   
reply to post by Mr Tranny
 


They dun goofed.
I noticed that as well. I was like where is all the good stuff.

But they updated to video and put back in the missing parts.
the first vid is alot longer now.




top topics



 
6

log in

join