Newly released emails from WikiLeaks purportedly reveal the contents of Hillary Clinton’s paid speeches to various groups around the world. They show a personal stance on the Environment, pipelines, and fracking that is quite different from her public energy policy.

The various paid speeches allowed the Clinton Foundation to pull in over $200 million in speaking fees from Wall Street firms, corporations, banking institutions, consultants, and more. Overall, they provide a window into dozens of speeches that Hillary Clinton has refused to release to the media or the public.

Notably, on the subject of fracking, the emails demonstrate a presidential candidate with private and public agendas. As demonstrated in the speeches, Clinton clearly believed that fracking could allow the United States to become energy independent, and drive more power plants to use cleaner burning natural gas rather than coal.

Private vs. public position

During the primary campaign, however, Clinton took pains to identify herself with Bernie Sanders’ calls for the eventual abolishment of all fossil fuels.

Clinton has called for less exploration of fracking on federal lands, more regulations, and supports a state’s right to ban fracking over a community’s objections. This essentially paralleled the recent DNC platform switch from an “all-of-the-above energy” policy to one based only on renewables.

While speaking to Banco Itau, Clinton purportedly praised Argentina for using “new technologies to unlock natural gas.” In that May 16, 2013, speech, WikiLeaks cites Clinton as saying, “The United States is not the only country in our hemisphere enjoying an energy revolution, Canada, Mexico, Brazil, is developing major new oil finds, continues to lead the way on bio fuels.

Argentina is using new technologies to unlock natural gas.”

Promoted fracking around the world

Privately, she also allegedly told Deutsche Bank on April 24, 2013, that the world should thank the U.S. for fracking. She said the technique for getting oil and natural gas out of shale rock by using pressurized fluid was developed by the Department of Energy.

“I mean, the whole idea of how fracking came to be available in the marketplace is because of our government,” Clinton told that audience. She also said that she had “promoted fracking in other places around the world.”

Clinton and Putin

In that same Deutsche Bank speech, she also said that “when you look at the strangle-hold that energy has on so many countries and the decisions that they make, it would be in America's interest to make even more countries more energy self-sufficient.”

In response to Putin’s efforts with natural gas, Clinton said she “began having conversations with the Europeans” to become more energy self-sufficient.

That meant embracing fracking and pipelines. She admitted it was part of a larger scheme to make it difficult for Russian President Vladimir “Putin to maintain his hold on leadership, even with his inner circle.”

Hillary’s dual energy positions

And in March 2014, Clinton told the International Leaders Series, Palais des Congres de Montréal, that how far Putin’s “aggressiveness goes I think is really up to us. I would like to see us accelerating the development of pipelines from Azerbaijan up into Europe.” She wanted Europe to get out from under the sleeping bear and accelerate their own domestic production.

“Poland recently signed a big contract to explore hydraulic fracturing to see what it could produce,” she said. “Apparently, there is thought to be some good [natural gas] reserves there. And just really go at this in a self-interested, smart way. The Russians can only intimidate you if you are dependent upon them.”

It will be interesting to see if the mainstream media will bristle at Clinton’s private support for fracking and enhanced fossil fuel production. While there may be valid policy concerns in confronting Putin’s own oil renaissance, Clinton is clearly not sharing her full beliefs with the electorate.