Hot off the front page of the Drudge Report is the following:
Clintons: $109.2 Million in 7 Years
Friday April 4, 4:21 pm ET
By Jim Kuhnhenn, Associated Press Writer
Clintons Report $109.2 Million in Income Over 7 Years
WASHINGTON (AP) — Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton and former President Clinton report nearly $109.2 million in income for seven years in newly released tax data.
The Democratic presidential candidate and her husband paid $33.8 million in taxes from 2000 through 2007. They listed $10.25 million in charitable contributions during that period.
Clinton has been under pressure to release her tax returns, especially from rival Barack Obama, who posted his 2000 to 2006 returns on his campaign Web site last week. Neither Obama nor Republican Sen. John McCain have made their 2007 tax returns public, though both say they will this month.
Gilbert note: The sad part of this story is that every candidate releases this data. There is nothing wrong with being a successful capitalist and selling your books and making public appearances once you leave office.
As I compare their revenue Vs donations my only question is how much of the $10.25 million listed as charities were paid to their church in the form of tithes and offerings.
Juice readers. Now that we know this data what impact will it have on your assessment of Hillary’s campaign effort?
How important is it to know this financial data anyway?
Is it possible that some of their funds are a result of president Bill Clinton’s lobbying efforts on behalf of any other nations which may impact our position in current or future transactions such as “free trade” agreements and tariffs?
Bravo!
Email response:
I believe it was Bill Clinton who coined the phrase “I feel your pain,” was it not? There’s the rub!
Actually, doesn’t this say a lot about why Hillary might want to take the hardest job in the world since it pays less than what she’s capable of making in the private sector?
Just playing devil’s advocate here.
SMS
Bill Clinton has at least EARNED his wealth, unlike Bush Jr. who was born with a platinum spoon in his mouth, or John McCain who apparently married money.
Anon. I just love it when you go on the attack. I did not mention president Bush or president McCain yet you felt the need to interject them in your rebuttal.
My post did not question the right of anyone to become successful and wealthy. That’s the beauty of living in America. There are many self made millionaires in the USA. The only possible question relates to any lobbying that Bill Clinton may have engaged in since leaving the White House that could have an impact on our foreign relations.
SMS.
There are truly jobs taken in the public sector which pay significantly less than you can earn in the private sector. You throw your hat in the ring theoretically to do some good for your fellow countrymen. Many, representing both major parties, do it to satisfy their ego’s.
Other than great public sector retirement pensions there is always the possiblity of making a chunk of change as lobbyists once you can legally begin engaging in that profession.
They already make enough money. I don’t think that they think they need any more. You really think they’re that greedy? I don’t.
SMS
Larry, who are you kidding? Your dislike of the Clintons is palpable, you may not have criticized them out right but instead suggest that they didn’t give enough to charity or that somehow Hillary might be tainted through Bill’s lobbying. I noticed that you didn’t write a post on Cindy McCain’s 100 million dollar [ inherited ] beer fortune and why someone with that much money would need to steal from her own charity. That is a FAR more INTERESTING story than, ex-president gives speeches and writes books and makes lots of money. Let’s be real, EVERYTIME their is a story about infidelity somehow Bill Clinton’s name gets dropped, turn about is FAIRPLAY.
Larry,
Since you mentioned the possible impact of a former President on foreign relations…
How about the impact of continuing relations between Bush 1 and the Saudi Royal family and their oil barons? You know, the leaders in the country that produced almost all the 9/11 airplane hijackers.
SMS.
How much money is enough in your opinion? For some people you can never have enough.
I do not fault nor envy anyone who earns a living from writing books or public speaking appearances.
However we must be cautious of those leaving public office who are hired by major military contractors or fortune 100 firms as lobbyists where they can open doors to major decision makers.
We currently have a one year cooling off period where former federal employees and members of Congress are forbidden to engage in lobbying to avoid any conflict of interest in what has been labeled a “government to lobbyist revolving door.”
Case in point. Over the past five years former president Bill Clinton has enjoyed a financial relationship with Ron Burkle involving Yucaipa Company that is connected to the nation of Dubai. Bill recently discussed severing that tie if Hillary becomes president. For those not familiar with the two year old story regarding Dubai let me simply say that in 2006 the US was very concerned over the possibility of Dubai Ports World taking over five American container terminals. This relates to US port operations and our port security. Therein lies the potential for a conflict of interest. If not, why is Bill willing to walk away from this $20 million bucket of cash?
anon 8:57 am.
Infidelity? Where did that topic enter this post? There are high profile people representing both sides of the aisle in Congress as well as some who formerly lived in a White House on Pennsylvania Ave. that can be included in that category. Want to name names?
Clever. did you see the current breakdown of their charitable giving. To themselves!
As to Bill’s lobbying simply read my above comment. He realizes the potential conflict so why don’t you?
Cindy McCain? Hmm. I wonder who you will list next. Do I hear envy? While I was not born with a silver spoon in my mouth I do not envy her good fortune or any member of the richest people in America, some of whom were self made and others were lucky by birth.
Following is an example of a self made millionaire. “Ephren Taylor II is a 24-year-old self-made multi-millionaire and youngest African-American CEO of a publicly traded company, City Capital Corporation and Amoro Corporation. He started his first business venture at age 12, made his first million by age 16, and currently oversees more than $100 million in assets.”
Others with a few more bucks than myself include Bill Gates, Warren Buffett and the Walton family heirs. Good for them.
What makes you think I don’t like the Clinton’s? I never met them.
The closest I came to the Clinton’s was in a Mission Viejo meeting with Susan McDougal who went to prison for 18 months rather than answer questions relating to the Whitewater banking scandel in Arkansas. PS: She was Pardoned in 2001 by president Bill Clinton just before he left office.
anon 9:13 AM
What makes you think I give president George H.W. Bush 41 a pass?
You do not have to remind me of our relationship with Saudi Arabia.
It’s more than just black gold. I have issues with that nation that predate 9-11.
Does the name Khobar Towers mean anything to you? It should. 19 US servicemen from the USAF were killed in Khobar, Saudi Arabia on June 25th 1996. In addition to the ringleaders, 13 Saudi’s were charged with their murder. I question the support of that government in the pre attack security of the premises and cooperation with US personnel in the investigation which followed.
This was not the only episode. We lost Americans in Riyadh in May of 2003 and again in May of 2004.
The same conflict of interest rules must apply equally to any former elected official. If you can prove that either president Bush 41 (or Bush 43) is engaging in any illegal activities than please share that information.
Larry, “Clintons struggle to get by on $109.2 million in the past 7 years” I believe the SNIDE inference was yours, no? As one who has been reading this blog for over a year it is easy to see that you have an axe to grind when it comes to the Clintons, just go back and read your own posts. I think if you are at all objective you will find a pattern of Clinton bashing. The McCains deserve the SAME scrutiny as the Clintons after all, he’s running for president too.
Case in point. Over the past five years former president Bill Clinton has enjoyed a financial relationship with Ron Burkle involving Yucaipa Company that is connected to the nation of Dubai. Bill recently discussed severing that tie if Hillary becomes president. For those not familiar with the two year old story regarding Dubai let me simply say that in 2006 the US was very concerned over the possibility of Dubai Ports World taking over five American container terminals. This relates to US port operations and our port security. Therein lies the potential for a conflict of interest. If not, why is Bill willing to walk away from this $20 million bucket of cash?
Exactly. Powerful people are SUPPOSED to have relationships with other powerful people. That fact that Bill is walking away from ‘a bucket of cash’ is only more evidence of the Clintons’ integrity. Clearly they are conscious of conflicts of interests and are addressing them appropriately.
SMS
Larry,
“What makes you think I give president George H.W. Bush 41 a pass?”
Because you only mentioned Clinton, that’s why. If you’d mentioned another President or two, I might come to the conclusion that your argument was more persuasive, fair, and balanced.
“If you can prove that either president Bush 41 (or Bush 43) is engaging in any illegal activities than please share that information.”
It isn’t necessarily a question of legality. It’s a question of what’s in the best interest of this country. Given what you say about Saudi Arabia, I assume you’d agree we need to be MUCH tougher with them. My point is that the relationships that Bush 1 and 2 have with the Saudis prevents them from bringing such toughness to bear. That’s what you call a dysfunctional Middle East posture.
Sarah.
It is true tha tworld leaders are exposed to powerful people, and the Bush’s and Clinton’s are not to be faulted for retianing thsoe relationships. I still feel that the sdecurity of our country must take precedent over personal gain.
Yes, Bill has offered to walk away from more money than most Americans will earn in a lifetime.
However, if the Dubai port deal had moved forward, do you have any concerns that he might have influenced that outcome?
anon 2:06 pm
I only referred to the Clinton’s in that the AP report which I used covered their past 7 years of earnings, not the Bush’s. Since writing this post we have permitted this story to wander around the globe. That’s OK!
As to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia you might be surprised with my opinion. As the world’s largest exporter of crude oil we cater to them. Let us not forget that it was not only the soverign emirate of Kuwait we protected from Saddam. If we hadn’t sent in a huge multi-national army Saddam would probably have continued rolling his tanks until he conquered the entire region including the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
From the Washington Institute I find the following text:
Financing Terrorism
Well into the war on terror, Saudi Arabia continues to serve as the capital of international terrorist financing. Through groups such as the Muslim World League, the International Islamic Relief Organization, and the al-Haramain Islamic Foundation, as well as through Islamic affairs bureaus at Saudi embassies and consulates worldwide, Saudis continue to fund radical Islamic groups that support or engage in international terrorism.
Some cases are both clear cut and extreme. For example, after his arrest in Indonesia on June 5, 2002, Omar al-Farouq, al-Qaeda’s operational point man in Southeast Asia, told his interrogators that al-Qaeda activities in the region were funded through a branch of al-Haramain. According to al-Farouq, “money was laundered through the foundation by donors from the Middle East.” In another case, Italian wiretaps monitoring members of a European al-Qaeda cell overheard a senior operative reassuring his subordinate about funding: “Don’t ever worry about money, because Saudi Arabia’s money is your money.”
SMS, et al.
Sorry for the typo’s. There may come a time when I actually double check my spelling and grammer before hitting the send key.
Larry,
Dubai is like the Hawaii of the Middle East. They’re very western and are a service based economy. Guess who they’re serving? Americans!
I honestly thought it was unfortunate that racism was exploited to undermine that deal. Honestly, I was against the deal at first, then I saw through the propaganda.
SMS
Sarah.
When I think of the Dubai port issue I am reminded of another similar concern namely COSCO. No, not the “big box” store but ownership of facilities at the south and north entrances of the Panama Canal. COSCO, the China Ocean Shipping Company, which has carried armaments around the globe, attempted to acquire our former 144 acre US Naval Station at Long Beach. Homeland Security. Where do we draw the line? Sadly, since 9-11, that decison has forever been changed.
All I can say is: Dubai is NOT China. I mean, when is the jury going to come back on whether or not China is our friend or enemy?
I haven’t decided myself yet, but personally, I would be afraid to visit there and I am outraged over their human rights violations.
SMS
Sarah.
The port issue relates to general policy considerations, not if the buyer is friend or foe.
As to China. We visited mainland China for three weeks at this time last year. You can read my June 3rd Op-Ed in the OC Register entitled “what I saw of freedom in China.” Although we were in a group of 30 we also broke free in the evenings away from our leaders and didn’t feel threatened. We also had full access to the Internet from al of our hotels. That may not have been the case for locals living in private homes.
Oh, ok. As a matter of general policy I agree.
As far as your internet use in China, you should read this:
http://www.hrw.org/reports/2006/china0806/3.htm
Sorry.
SMS
Oh yeah. They’re calling it ‘The Great Firewall of China!’ Lovin’ it!
SMS
Sarah.
Sorry that I didn’t get out to HB tonite to see Vern. Local obligation.
I agree that China has restricted access by locals to Internet cites however they still have a big problem. Of the 1.3 billion people living in China many are walking around with over 400 million cell phones. While there are 900 million peasants the rest of their populace are blue and white collar workers living in new housing and driving new cars. We were amazed at the latest technology in electronics, such as MP-4 players that we found in their Shanghai malls. Before leaving we even took a ride on their Maglev train.
As such they do have access to the outside world. I am not sure if cell phone calls can be blocked.
If the Clintons donated money to their church, they would be in line with most Americans, as churches receive the lions share of charitable deductions [about 35% ] but as we all know, if the Clintons do it, then it’s bad, real bad. Right,Larry?
Anon 9:06 pm
We need to be careful here. There are many valid 501 C charities as well as tax deductable tithing to Churches.
As the Clinton’s claim to be Christians, and attend a church, based on the math it appears that they are not giving 10 percent of their income to their home church. Just in case you ask, I’ll save you so time on your keyboard, we do. We also give to Missions including Teen Challenge Intl. in Santa Ana for their work with local kids and young adults.
I have not looked at the pie chart of charitable giving so I won’t contest your 35 percent figure.
Let me also go on record and say state that if the Bush’s or the Cheney’s engage in similar charitable giving to Foundations where they are the Board I will give them the same critical exposure. We are all accountable for our actions including the formation and funding of personal charities simply to avoid a tax obligation. To retain my credibility and integrity I do not look to see what political party you belong to when pointing out abuses.
As brother Thomas has posted an update on this post perhaps future comments might be added to his report.
Larry-
China also famously monitors and logs all internet use. I doubt their phones are much different. As soon as I come across the news story about the internet cataloging again, I’ll email it to you.
SMS
Larry –
Your headline clearly sends the message of disdain for the Clintons. Don’t be such a South County hypocrite.
Anon 12:46 pm.
“Headlines” are chosen to get the readers attention. Obviously it caught yours.
Let’s see what Webster says about hyporictes:
hypocrite
1 : a person who puts on a false appearance of virtue or religion
2 : a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings
Sorry to report but I do not hide my beliefs, feelings, or thoughts on religion.
In case no one has told you I am a conservative, small government, Republican. More conservative than our current president and I have pointed out my issues with this administration in my writings.
Larry, anon 12:46 has you pegged correctly; hypocrite. You claim to be neutral as to the Clintons while all evidence points to the contrary. On second thought, maybe anon 12:46 was being generous, you could be just a plain old garden variety LIAR.