<p>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.</p>
<p>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.</p>
<p>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. </p>
<p>Neither Obama nor Republican Sen. John McCain have made their 2007 tax returns public, though both say they will this month.</p>
<p>The Clintons won’t release their 2007 tax returns now, because they asked for a six month extension on filing! :rolleyes:</p>
<p>Typical Clinton deception. How slick. :eek:</p>
<p>“Although the New York senator revealed highlights of tax returns from 2007, she requested an extension for their full disclosure, citing the need for more information on a blind trust dissolved last year.”</p>
<p>momof2inca called the Friday afternoon release of information right.
By Monday, it will be old news… Another Clinton scam.</p>
<p>So the shocking news is that Bill made a lot of money giving speeches. Big deal–so did every other ex-President. I seem to recall that Reagan got a million bucks for a single appearance in Japan. I guess she thought it would hurt her image with blue-collar workers when it came out just how much money she has. They did also make 15 million on investments, but that’s not too shocking when you have that kind of money to invest.</p>
<p>What is amazing is that they came out of the White House deeply in debt (mostly to their lawyers). Now look at them! Nothing like writing 2 books and giving lots of speeches…</p>
<p>Do you think George W. has a book in him? And how much will the publishers pay him for it?</p>
<p>I hope George W. gets the chance to use his celebrity status to make a lot of money. Any person who becomes president of the United States, deserves the opportunity to profit from it when they are gone. (Even Jimmy Carter). It’s not like you can get another job. Yea; I’d like to see Bill Clinton’s resume as he goes to look for another job. “Past employment: President of the United States:” “Past Salary: $400,000”. </p>
<p>No, GW and any other president has earned the right to capitalize on their status. If people want to pay to hear them speak, more power to them.</p>
<p>@Christcorp
Assuming the work they profit off is not unethical, I’d agree. However, it is ridicuous to say that they can’t get money after President without those opportunities (e.g. books). Presidents have a yearly salary after they leave the office.</p>
<p>Yes, they get a salary. But they were the leader of the most powerful and influential nation on the planet. If someone wants to pay to hear them speak, write a book, etc… then more power to them. There isn’t anything unethical about that.</p>
<p>If an ex-President is paid to give speeches, that is just fine with me. But seriously, nobody pays these guys just for speeches. The money is usually given with the expectation that an ex-President can provide contacts and leads that help in more concrete ways to improve someone’s bottom line, or someone’s political career. I guess it can be done ethically and it can be done unethically. In general I don’t think the Clintons are the most ethical politicians but that isn’t going to be a big factor in my decision making process.</p>
<p>True; a former president’s pension currently is $191,300 a year. That could be considered a lot of money. Depending on your perspective. But hopefully they had some other investments. After taxes and the other fringe benefits they had, that is a pretty substantial pay cut in standard of living. Plus, not actually working at another job pretty much leaves only books, speeches, etc… as a source of income. But of course there will be those who have no sympathy for someone making that type of income as a pension. Of course, an ex-ceo of a company would probably make 10 times that amount as a parachute payment when leaving a company. Being the president of the united states is a little bit more important and deserving than a CEO. Again, it’s all a matter of perspective.</p>
<p>@Christcorp
“If someone wants to pay to hear them speak, write a book, etc… then more power to them. There isn’t anything unethical about that.”</p>
<p>I never said there was. I just wished to clarify that getting paid to do unethical things is wrong. For instance, you would probably say getting paid to kill innocent people is wrong.</p>
<p>I’m sure you’re using the “being paid to kill innocent people” just as an example. I know you’re not talking about current military conditions. If so, there is definitely no tears being shed here.</p>
<p>The royalties and speaking fees may be high, but they are not unethical. Of concern are some of the investments, such as the one with Ron Burkle.</p>
<p>If it’s okay for the U.S. government to have its largest contracts in Iraq with a Dubai-based company (Halliburton) that no longer has to pay any taxes, it certainly is okay for a former President to be in Dubai’s employ. If they own the rest of us, why shouldn’t they own a piece of a former President?</p>
<p>It’s all about over anyway. Hil isn’t getting 65% of the vote in PA.</p>
<p>She doesn’t need 65% of the PA vote. She’s going to convince all of Obama’s delegates to change over to her, seat the FL and MI delegates, (all in her favor, of course) and have the superdelegates decide to support the candidate she thinks should win.</p>
