Clintons Made $109 Million in Last 8 Years

[LadyMod at scam.com]

Hmmmmmmm.........


Clintons Made $109 Million in Last 8 Years (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/05/us/politics/05clintons.html?_r=1&th&emc=th&oref=slogin)

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2008/04/05/us/05clintonTAX.span2.jpg
By MIKE McINTIRE
Published: April 5, 2008

Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton and former President Bill Clinton released tax data Friday showing they earned $109 million over the last eight years, an ascent into the uppermost tier of American taxpayers that seemed unimaginable in 2001, when they left the White House with little money and facing millions in legal bills.

The bulk of their wealth has come from speaking and book-writing, which together account for almost $92 million, including a $15 million advance — larger than previously thought — from Mr. Clinton’s 2004 autobiography, “My Life.” The former president’s vigorous lecture schedule, where his speeches command upwards of $250,000, brought in almost $52 million.

During that time, the Clintons paid $33.8 million in federal taxes and claimed deductions for $10.2 million in charitable contributions. The contributions went to a family foundation run by the Clintons that has given away only about half of the money they put into it, and most of that was last year, after Mrs. Clinton declared her candidacy.

Mrs. Clinton’s campaign released the eight years of income tax information late Friday, following a rising clamor on the campaign trail for her to follow the lead of her opponent, Senator Barack Obama, who had previously disclosed his tax returns for the same period. In what proved to be an awkward juxtaposition, the disclosure of the records — which revealed the Clintons to be in the top one-hundredth of 1 percent, or roughly 14,500, of all taxpayers — came on the day that Mrs. Clinton called for the creation of a cabinet-level post to tackle poverty.

In releasing seven years of tax returns, plus a summary of income for last year, the Clinton campaign noted that the couple had disclosed all their income tax records since Mr. Clinton was governor of Arkansas. Neither Mr. Obama, of Illinois, nor Senator John McCain of Arizona, the presumptive Republican nominee, has released his 2007 tax-return information, and Mr. McCain has not released tax returns from previous years.

“The Clintons have now made public 30 years of tax returns, a record matched by few people in public service,” said Jay Carson, a campaign spokesman. “None of Hillary Clinton’s presidential opponents have revealed anything close to this amount of personal financial information.”

Mr. Obama’s tax returns show that he and his wife, Michelle, reported about $1 million in income in 2006, much of it from his book deals. Mr. McCain’s wife, Cindy, an heiress to a beer distributorship fortune, is believed to be worth tens of millions of dollars, but the exact amount is unclear.

Speaking to a statewide convention of North Dakota Democrats in Grand Forks on Friday, Mrs. Clinton criticized the Bush administration’s tax cuts, which she said favored the rich, then referred to the tax data she and her husband released earlier in the day.

“Now don’t get me wrong, I have absolutely nothing against rich people,” she said. “As a matter of fact, my husband, much to my surprise and his, has made a lot of money since he left the White House, by doing what he loves doing most — talking to people. But we didn’t ask for George Bush’s tax cuts. We didn’t want them, and we didn’t need them.”

Although there is no requirement that candidates release their tax returns, it has been common practice since the 1970s; a release typically occurs after a candidate becomes a party nominee, not during the primaries.

The returns provide the most detailed look at the Clintons’ finances since 2000, when they last made their returns public, and in many ways provide an unusually detailed look at the earning power of a former president. Never before has the spouse of a former president run for office, forcing disclosure of their finances.

In fact, since Mrs. Clinton announced her campaign for president, controversies involving her husband’s business and philanthropic endeavors have occasionally raised questions about the potential for ethical conflicts should she win the White House. Among them is Mr. Clinton’s partnership with Ronald W. Burkle, the billionaire investor and supermarket magnate, whose deals have included investing money for the government of Dubai and acquiring a stake in a Chinese media company.

Mr. Clinton had previously not disclosed what he earned from that partnership, but the tax returns show he collected at least $12.6 million since 2002, and possibly as much as $15.3 million, from his work as an adviser and rainmaker for Mr. Burkle’s Yucaipa Companies. The lack of clarity is because the Clintons released only a summary of their 2007 income, which lists $2.7 million in partnership income but does not identify sources. Based on previous years’ returns, it is likely that income came from Yucaipa.


MORE (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/05/us/politics/05clintons.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1&th&emc=th)

[Moby]

One of the things that Republican Romney fans (Neoconservative media) was touting was his ability to earn money. They spoke about it as a very positive thing.

If that's the case then shouldn't this be a very positive thing?

I wonder if we can get any other ex-president to release his tax returns.

[Cat slave]

I think the rub is his claim to "feel your pain"....oh please!

Hes "felt" a lot of things but what we live day in and day out is not one of them.:p Typical elitist mind set.

[Smurf-Herder]

Clinton Tax Returns Released
http://tammybruce.com/2008/04/clinton_tax_returns_released.php

"Hillary Clinton and her campaign repeatedly highlight her ardent feminism, her lifelong advocacy of workers’ rights, her consistent support for unions, and her love of Israel.

But those principles go right out the window if there’s money involved. When it comes to lining their pockets, the Clintons have a double standard. While Hillary chastises American corporations and employers for lay-offs and opposition to greater union organizing rights, Bill is paid big bucks that go into their joint bank accounts to legitimize the anti-Semitic, anti-worker, anti-union, and anti-woman Arab state of the UAE and its emirates of Dubai.

It’s not just Bill’s $1.2 million Dubai speaking fees that have enriched the Clintons, and its not just the million dollar contribution by the Emir of Dubai to the Clinton Presidential Library that has endeared the Islamic monarchy to them.

It’s much more that that: Bill Clinton was personally responsible for delivering the ruler of Dubai and Prime Minister of the U.A.E., Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum, to a partnership with Yucaipa Cos., headed by Bill and Hillary’s uber-fundraiser Ron Burkle.

Bill Clinton is a paid adviser and member of the Board of Directors of Yucaipa. Together, the Sheik and Yucaipa have formed a new company, Dubai Investment Group Limited, to jointly invest Yucaipa funds and the Sheik's personal funds.

So Bill Clinton is now an adviser and member of the board of directors of a company that is in partnership with the government of Dubai — a part of the world that blatantly discriminates against women, abuses workers in violation of international law, outlaws unions, deports strikers, and bans Israelis and their products from ever entering the country."

[LadyMod at scam.com]

Clinton Tax Returns Released
http://tammybruce.com/2008/04/clinton_tax_returns_released.php

"Hillary Clinton and her campaign repeatedly highlight her ardent feminism, her lifelong advocacy of workers’ rights, her consistent support for unions, and her love of Israel.

But those principles go right out the window if there’s money involved. When it comes to lining their pockets, the Clintons have a double standard. While Hillary chastises American corporations and employers for lay-offs and opposition to greater union organizing rights, Bill is paid big bucks that go into their joint bank accounts to legitimize the anti-Semitic, anti-worker, anti-union, and anti-woman Arab state of the UAE and its emirates of Dubai.

It’s not just Bill’s $1.2 million Dubai speaking fees that have enriched the Clintons, and its not just the million dollar contribution by the Emir of Dubai to the Clinton Presidential Library that has endeared the Islamic monarchy to them.

It’s much more that that: Bill Clinton was personally responsible for delivering the ruler of Dubai and Prime Minister of the U.A.E., Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum, to a partnership with Yucaipa Cos., headed by Bill and Hillary’s uber-fundraiser Ron Burkle.

Bill Clinton is a paid adviser and member of the Board of Directors of Yucaipa. Together, the Sheik and Yucaipa have formed a new company, Dubai Investment Group Limited, to jointly invest Yucaipa funds and the Sheik's personal funds.

So Bill Clinton is now an adviser and member of the board of directors of a company that is in partnership with the government of Dubai — a part of the world that blatantly discriminates against women, abuses workers in violation of international law, outlaws unions, deports strikers, and bans Israelis and their products from ever entering the country."


Don't you just LOVE the double speak?


Give me the guy with the racist pastor any day. ;)



Lady Mod

[Moby]

I think the rub is his claim to "feel your pain"....oh please!

Hes "felt" a lot of things but what we live day in and day out is not one of them.:p Typical elitist mind set.
You've totally lost me here. What's up with "feel your pain"?

[Moby]

I dont listen to commentators much because I can form my own opinions. However, what did she say about this administration's connection to Dubai?

[bigfootzx]

Good for them, with that kind of money she can go build her own whitehouse and run the budget anyway she wants and Bill can flirt with the french maids pretending to be interns. She'll be on her way back to NY soon!

[LadyMod at scam.com]

http://www.debbieschlussel.com/archives/2006/02/somethings_rott.html

Neil Bush is a frequent visitor to and paid speaker in Dubai, showing up there right after 9/11 trying to get investors for his failed Ignite! educational software company. While there, "[Neil] Bush held talks with Dubai's Crown Prince Sheikh Mohammad bin Rashid al-Maktoum [DS: who now rules Dubai] and Information Minister Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed al-Nahyan on the 'world economy in light of recent events, as well as higher education in universities," Arab American Business reported. Bush was in Dubai so much that he e-mailed his wife of his desire for a divorce from his Dubai hotel room.

(Bush's relationship with the Dubaian and UAE royals has a lot to do with his Syrian-American Ba'athist boss, Jamal Daniel, who paid him $60,000 a year for only a few hours work. Bush's marriage to his second wife was held at Daniel's palatial Houston mansion.)

At a Saudi speech, he encouraged conferees to expand lobbying and PR efforts to change "perceptions" about the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. One wonders if the content is similar at his meetings and speeches in the Emirates. At least Billy Carter was a lot more aw-shucks honest. ("The only thing I can say is there is a hell of a lot more Arabians than there is Jews.")

It's not just Bush's paid speaking engagements courtesy of Dubai's Datamatrix. While Neil Bush is prominently displayed on the company's website (and listed as "Brother of US President George Bush"), so are Clintonistas Al Gore and Sandy Berger (he of document pants-stuffing fame).

It's also Neil Bush's paid speeches to the Zayed Center, which was funded by UAE's President, Sheik Zayed bin Sultan al-Nahyan, who recently died. As my friend, Rachel Lea Fish of The David Project, wrote in the Wall Street Journal:

Sheik Zayed also funds the Abu Dhabi-based Zayed Center for Coordination and Follow-Up, a prominent think tank of the Arab League, founded in 1999. The Zayed Center, described on its Web site "as the fulfillment of the vision of Sheikh Zayed," promotes Holocaust denial, anti-American conspiracy theories and hate speech in its lectures, symposiums and publications. In August 2002, the Los Angeles Times quoted Mohammed Murar, the executive director of the Zayed Center, saying about Jews that "the truth is they are the enemies of all nations." His comment came on the heels of a Zayed Center report stating that "the Zionists are the people who killed the Jews in Europe."

The Zayed Center has a history of giving Holocaust deniers like David Irving a forum to promulgate their ideas. In 1998, Sheik Zayed's wife donated $50,000 to finance the defense of infamous Holocaust denier Roger Garaudy in a French court.

In April 2002, the Zayed Center hosted Thierry Meyssan, the French author of "The Appalling Fraud," which claims that the U.S. military staged the 9/11 attacks. The center translated Mr. Meyssan's book into Arabic, hailed its publication and widely advertised the work. A month later, Lyndon LaRouche, the fringe political figure who has made disparaging remarks about Judaism, was an honored guest. Just last month, the center hosted Umayma Jalahma, a professor of Islamic Studies at King Faisal University, who declared: "The Jewish people must obtain human blood so that their clerics can prepare for holiday pastries."


It's bad enough the President's brother took money from this organization. It's much worse that the confederation, whose leader funded, this despicable group will be rewarded with controlling OUR ports. This is what they think, and we are going to trust them with our valuable points of entry for goods?

Then, there is the Homeland Security hype in support of this deal. Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff made the rounds of the Sunday political shows praising the deal and defending it. His predecessor, Tom Ridge, also touted the deal on FOX News. Ridge is the same man who signed a Memorandum of Understanding with John Ashcroft, taking away ALL terrorism investigations away from Homeland Security and giving them to the bureaucracy that bungled 9/11, the FBI.

Finally, there is the other problem with port ship and shipment investigations associated with the creation of Homeland Security and the reorganization of the former INS and U.S. Customs Service into ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement). When two huge tasks that don't jibe are foisted on one agency in a merger, as happened with ICE, one falls by the wayside. Since Immigration is now the primary--but far from diligently enforced--focus of ICE, former Customs investigations into smuggling from foreign countries has fallen by the way-side.

.

[LadyMod at scam.com]

Politisite, The Clinton's Prosper under a Bush Economy (http://www.nowpublic.com/world/politisite-clintons-prosper-under-bush-economy)

By Albert N. Milliron

The Math Doesn't Add up. Anyone figure out that 15.4 Million is not accounted for? That is where you should look. There is a Persian Connection to Pres. Clinton that is not listed. Why wouldn't they want us to know? Do they really think we won't re-do the Math? The Math comes out to 94 Million not 109 Million. 15.4 Million is missing. Gottcha, a Dubai connection from a off shore account called Yucaipa Global Opportunities Fund I. So what did the Former President do for Sheikh Mohammed Bin Rashid al- Maktoum?

What about your privacy? Bill Clinton received another $800,000 in 2006 and 2007 from data-mining company infoUSA owned by Vinod Gupta. (1) What did Clinton do for this money? Maybe sold democratic donors personal information for his own wealth. You might want to be careful when you send Hillary a check? (2)

I didn't see that extra check wrote out to the IRS. Remember President Clinton a related to America that he didn't pay enough taxes. President Bush Reminded him, in the State of the Union address, that the IRS does take cash or checks. (3) I hear most folks say, "wow they gave 10% of their income to Charity (4), how wonderful". A perfect example of a Liberal telling others the government should take care of the poor. Hey Bill, Hill you get 12 Million a year.. You need all that?? How about the countries you deserted Somalia, Rwanda??? If you think your taxes are so low and the government isn't doing enough. How about oh lets say 6 million a year?

I love these people running for president that make tons of money and give 10% or 4% in Obama's case. Wow a cool 1.2 million most of which went to his own Clinton organization, which really means a way to spend money under a not for profit to cover your traveling expences. Sure , you keep 6 million for yourself and wife. Can you live on that?

Here is my other Rant for the day. How about a means test for former presidents to have a Secret Service detail? Why can't the Clinton's pay for it? I understand poor presidents and wives should have a detail for National security reasons. We don't need an ex-president taken as a hostage. But if you make 12 million a year, couldn't you hire you own security detail? Hey Bill it costs the taxpayers of America 38,000 dollars (5) each time you make a speech for 30,000 dollars. How about quit speaking and you would have saved the government 30 million dollars in secret service fees.

And my rant continues. Bill Clinton had investments in off shore accounts? Thats right Bill is so pro-American he invests money where the IRS can't look at the books. What about investing in America? Hire a few people.

What will the Clinton Public Relations firm say on Monday. Oh I love spin! This just shows the Clinton's can make money, wouldn't it be great to have these two back in the White House so they can translate their expertise for making money to helping hard working Americans and America's economy.

I say, if the Bush economy is so bad, how could you make all that money and raise all that money from all your donors. Yeah, things are so bad that people making 30K a year are sending 2 grand to you so you can fix this awful economy.


.

[Moby]

Is the Dubai thing another double standard here?

The Bush family has always had strong ties with The Middle East and mainly the country that produced 80% of the 9/11 terrorists. Halliburton has moved their headquarters to Dubai so now that's the country that gets all the no bid contracts. Bush wanted to give our port security to Dubai.

This sounds like double standards again but that's what the Neoconservative media loves.

[LadyMod at scam.com]

I dont listen to commentators much because I can form my own opinions. However, what did she say about this administration's connection to Dubai?

She was pretty harsh for someone who owes a good chunk of her wealth to her husband's speaking engagements there. LOL



March 12, 2007, 4:40 pm

Clinton on Halliburton and Dubai (http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/03/12/clinton-on-haliburton-and-dubai/)

Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton lashed out at Halliburton today for its announcement that it would open a corporate headquarters in Dubai and move its chief executive officer there. The action has raised a lot of questions, and Senator Clinton was quick to link the company to its multi-billion defense and war contracts as well as its ties to Vice President Dick Cheney.

At a press conference in the Bronx this afternoon, she had this to say:

“We just heard news that this company that Vice President Cheney used to be in charge of called Halliburton has decided to move their corporate headquarters overseas, and I think that raises a lot of serious issues we have to look at.

“Does this mean they’re going to quit paying taxes in America? They’re going to take all the advantage of our country but not pay their fair share of taxes. You know, they get a lot of government contracts… Is this going to affect the investigations that are going on? Because we have a lot of evidence about their misuse of government contracts and how they have cheated the American soldier, cheated the American taxpayer. They have taken money and not provided the services. So, does moving overseas mean that we won’t be able to pursue these investigations?

“I think it raises a lot of very big concerns and I think we’re going to be looking into that in Washington. I think it’s disgraceful that American companies are more than happy to try to get no-bid contracts, like Halliburton has, and then turn around and say, ‘But, you know, we’re not going to stay with our chief executive officer, the president of our company, in the United States anymore.’ Well, I’m proud to be an American and I’m proud that this is the greatest country in the world.”

We’re told that because Halliburton is not moving its corporate identity or its main corporate offices, that indicates it would still be subject to United States tax laws and regulations. The same obviously may not necessarily apply to employees who move to the new office.

Update: Here’s the follow-up news (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/13/business/13halliburton.html?_r=1&oref=slogin) article.

Cassi Feldman contributed to this post.

[Smurf-Herder]

It's bad enough the President's brother took money from this organization. It's much worse that the confederation, whose leader funded, this despicable group will be rewarded with controlling OUR ports. This is what they think, and we are going to trust them with our valuable points of entry for goods?

Then, there is the Homeland Security hype in support of this deal. Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff made the rounds of the Sunday political shows praising the deal and defending it. His predecessor, Tom Ridge, also touted the deal on FOX News. Ridge is the same man who signed a Memorandum of Understanding with John Ashcroft, taking away ALL terrorism investigations away from Homeland Security and giving them to the bureaucracy that bungled 9/11, the FBI.



BTW, the Dubai deal wasn't for "control of ports"; just their specific pier facilities. And liberal paranoia and partisan misrepresentation fucked it up:

New Book Says Dubai Ports Deal Was CIA Front
http://sweetness-light.com/archive/book-says-dubai-ports-deal-was-a-cia-front

"Former Inside the Ring co-author Rowan Scarborough has written a new book revealing a key reason the Bush administration pressed hard for the 2006 deal for the United Arab Emirates-based Dubai Ports World to take over management of several U.S. ports.

According to Mr. Scarborough, the administration wanted the deal to go through because the UAE government had agreed to let the United States post agents inside its global port network who could report on world shipping.

Dubai Ports currently runs port facilities at key U.S. intelligence targets, including Venezuela, China, Pakistan, India and Saudi Arabia.

“Dubai Ports, in essence, was going to become an agent of CIA,” Mr. Scarborough said in an interview. “The arrangement is helping us detect whether any kind of terror contraband was being moved around.”

Funny how this thread was orginally designed to show Clinton's financial dealings; and when I show her hypocricy in them, it gets changed around into an anti-Bush thread. Old habits die hard. What are you people going to do when there's no more Bush to bash?

[LadyMod at scam.com]

BTW, the Dubai deal wasn't for "control of ports"; just their specific pier facilities. And liberal paranoia and partisan misrepresentation fucked it up:

New Book Says Dubai Ports Deal Was CIA Front
http://sweetness-light.com/archive/book-says-dubai-ports-deal-was-a-cia-front

"Former Inside the Ring co-author Rowan Scarborough has written a new book revealing a key reason the Bush administration pressed hard for the 2006 deal for the United Arab Emirates-based Dubai Ports World to take over management of several U.S. ports.

According to Mr. Scarborough, the administration wanted the deal to go through because the UAE government had agreed to let the United States post agents inside its global port network who could report on world shipping.

Dubai Ports currently runs port facilities at key U.S. intelligence targets, including Venezuela, China, Pakistan, India and Saudi Arabia.

“Dubai Ports, in essence, was going to become an agent of CIA,” Mr. Scarborough said in an interview. “The arrangement is helping us detect whether any kind of terror contraband was being moved around.”

Funny how this thread was orginally designed to show Clinton's financial dealings; and when I show her hypocricy in them, it gets changed around into an anti-Bush thread. Old habits die hard. What are you people going to do when there's no more Bush to bash?

That was just the closest thing I could find referring to the ports and what Hillary said about them. It really wasn't meant to be an anti-bush statement, just her whole comment on it at that time.

I am aware of what the port deal was supposed to be and how it got twisted to misinform the public. But that was not my point in posting that particular story.


Lady Mod

[Moby]

Funny how this thread was orginally designed to show Clinton's financial dealings; and when I show her hypocricy in them, it gets changed around into an anti-Bush thread. Old habits die hard. What are you people going to do when there's no more Bush to bash?
Funny, I thought it was about double standards.

Hillary with ties to Dubai is negative.
Bush with ties to Osama Bin Laden is positive.

Hillary making money is negative.
Romney making money is positive.

Former President Bill making money is negative.
Former President Bush making money is not discussed.

[Smurf-Herder]

That was just the closest thing I could find referring to the ports and what Hillary said about them. It really wasn't meant to be an anti-bush statement, just her whole comment on it at that time.

I am aware of what the port deal was supposed to be and how it got twisted to misinform the public. But that was not my point in posting that particular story.


Lady Mod

okay.

I was against the deal at first, myself. Until I thought about it more.

[Smurf-Herder]

Funny, I thought it was about double standards.

Hillary with ties to Dubai is negative.
Bush with ties to Osama Bin Laden is positive.

Hillary making money is negative.
Romney making money is positive.

Former President Bill making money is negative.
Former President Bush making money is not discussed.

The point was, the specific connection with Hillary being against the Dubai deal while Bill was bringing home the Dubai-Bacon. You can't compare that with anything else, because nobody else was a hypocrite about Dubai. They were straight-forward about supporting the deal. Hillary was against it, because they weren't trustworthy - while her husband was making millions working for their government.

[Moby]

The point was, the specific connection with Hillary being against the Dubai deal while Bill was bringing home the Dubai-Bacon. You can't compare that with anything else, because nobody else was a hypocrite about Dubai. They were straight-forward about supporting the deal. Hillary was against it, because they weren't trustworthy - while her husband was making millions working for their government.
What am I missing here?

She was against Dubai Ports World purchasing a British company that was going to run 6 US ports. Why does that make her a hypocrite? Was Bill working on the deal to help Dubai Ports World make the purchase?

Just because she was against the deal doesn't mean that she has to be prejudice against the entire nation does it?

[kres24GT]

One of the things that Republican Romney fans (Neoconservative media) was touting was his ability to earn money. They spoke about it as a very positive thing.

If that's the case then shouldn't this be a very positive thing?

I wonder if we can get any other ex-president to release his tax returns.


I agree, it's like when people who support gay rights criticize politcians for being gay.

I am a Bill fan, although I can't stand Hillary.... kudos to them both for their success though.