Hillary's Unreleased Tax Returns Now Make Her Riskiest Candidate for November
Bill Clinton is fond of injecting doubt about Barack Obama's ability to weather radical right wing attacks in the general election. After all, his argument goes, Hillary has been completely vetted, and is still standing. Why then, he continues, take the risk of an Obama candidacy?
Obama's victories suggest that Bill Clinton's arguments have not been widely embraced. For one thing Bill Clinton is not exactly the perfect vehicle for delivering that message, having shown himself to be a risk to her campaign by his own misstatements.
The last debate, however, pointed to a risk of a Clinton candidacy even larger than Bill himself. Asked whether she would release her tax returns, Hillary waffled, finally agreeing to do so prior to the nomination, but not before Ohio/Texas primary day. Her excuse: she is too busy on the campaign trail to collect all those documents.
Huh? Her tax returns are already done and submitted to the IRS. She does not have to collect papers. All she need do is leave her accountant a voice mail (about 15 seconds), and have him hit the "send" button on his computer that stores her returns. If she can watch Saturday Night Live and MSNBC (she referred to her having watched them during the debate), then she certainly has 15 seconds to provide her accountant instructions to send out her tax returns.
Then, today, we are told by the campaign that there will be no tax returns released until after she secures the nomination.
Let us agree with Hillary that the American people care about their jobs, their children's education, the Iraq War, healthcare, and other issues that directly impact them, and not candidates' tax returns.
Nonetheless, it is hard to listen to the waffling, and then the redrawn line-in-the-sand, without assuming that there must be some very embarrassing information in those returns that would turn off voters. Why else would she just not release them, and remove doubt?
If this information were minor embarrassments, she would have released the returns months ago when she was still the overwhelming frontrunner, let the news cycle a few days, and then die a death of boredom. It cannot be embarrassment at their wealth or income, because that is obvious -- one does not loan a campaign their last $5 million.
Thus, the Clintons are asking voters -- most immediately in Texas, Ohio, Rhode Island and Vermont -- to take the risk that tax returns that they are keeping secret, seemingly at all costs, do not trip them up miserably in a general election.
Waffle, promise and then withdrawal of that promise... it is not the press, not the Obama campaign, not even the radical rightwing, but the Clinton campaign, in another tactical blunder, that has succeeded in raising the stakes on this matter.
Is Hillary, as she claims, completely vetted? Not, anymore, without release of those tax returns.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
I fear Bill Clinton is knee deep in slime. It's not just the personal tax returns I'd like to see, but also a list of the contributors and amounts to the Clinton Presidential library. How would it look if he was getting money from the Bush family, for example?
I saw President Bush this morning campaigning for Hillary just like Bill had promised: having a special news conference just to say that when Obama says he will meet with foreign leaders, that is a terrible idea and will create dictatorships and chaos throughout the world. Like anyone should ever listen to George W. Bush when it comes to foreign policy.
Hillary claims her Senate disclosures are readily available, but I can only find them online for two years. I'm curious if Bill started getting the big bucks only when it came close to election time, and corporations wanted to buy her loyalty.
Also this whole corporate feel-good hootenanny Bill holds every year bringing together the major corporations of the world and the supplicants, passing out alms to the poor. I'd love to see how much Bill gets out of that arrangement too.
Finally, the private Clinton charity they set up: we need full disclosure on that too. They've hidden millions of dollars inside that charity so they don't have to pay taxes on their income like all the working folks do. How did they end up with so many "extra" millions of dollars that they have hide it in special personalized charities?
Yep, remember Bill was consulting the Saudis on how to buy American ports. He has consulted a Canadian Mining Mogul on deals in Khazhakistan, not to mention the millions of dollars he is getting from under-handed deals with phamaceutical companies dealing in India, Africa and to a small extent, China, Singapore and Malysia. Bill has been selling access to Washington and will continue to sell access to the Hillary WH. Hillary has not been vetted. Not by a long shot.
Why? Afraid she'll have some Wall-Mart stock returns tucked in there?
I think it's obvious that the relationship with Rezko is far more relevant.
That cuts to the heart of ethics.
So let's hear some honest discussion about that.
Then we'll talk tax returns.
But no one is not releasing information on Rezko, and Obama's tax returns are released already.
It also appears that the Clintons had some relationship with Rezko....
You're nuts if you think Rezko is Clinton's problem.
What the hell is she doing? Her campaign is a train wreck. Show us or get out.
Tax returns have zip to do with this election. It's just a talking point.
If you found them squeaky clean, would that change your vote?
Nope.
It was just another way to imply that the Clintons are dirty.
More Rovian tactics.
And in the meantime, Rezko is about to start singing about his relationship that dates back over 15 years with Obama.
Buckle up.
It's your turn.
So Hillary supporters are not concerned that she has flip-flopped since the debate on this issue? Could you explain?
"Asked whether she would release her tax returns, Hillary waffled, finally agreeing to do so prior to the nomination, but not before Ohio/Texas primary day. Her excuse: she is too busy on the campaign trail to collect all those documents.
"Then, today, we are told by the campaign that there will be no tax returns released until after she secures the nomination
Hillary Clinton has been working her tax returns like a ransom demand. Give me the nomination now and I'll give you the tax returns later. Guess what Hillary -- it's not somebody's child you're holding ransom, just your tax info. So I have an alternative offer. Keep your secrets secret, and we'll just go another direction with our nomination. In the end, that will probably be best for everyone.
I am voting for Obama twice and I think this is a non-issue.
Good God, a sensible Obama supporter?
My hat is off to you. I just wanted you to know I saw your post. LOL*
Let's see... Could they possibly be worried about the disclosure of tens of millions of dollars paid to Bill Clinton for his work lobbying on behalf of Dubai????? It might put a bit of a cramp on all of Hillary's loud and hypocritical rhetoric about leading us away from our "addiction" to foreign oil.
Bill's record as a former president will speak for itself.
As always...
He's fabulous and has raised so much money on behalf of AIDS efforts in Africa.
What's really a good lesson for everyone is just to do as the Clintons do.
Keep really being on behalf of people.
Let the critics and the slime-slingers and the prejudiced scream at you.
In the end, we all go to our deaths with our own true record of our actions. Those critics don't matter one bit.
So be true to yourself and to your principles.
That's the true message of Hope that Hillary shows us.
And it's extraordinarly powerful.
What about supporting the war until 2006, in terms of both votes and public statements, don't you get?What about her flag burning ban?
How about support of Leiberman in 2006, after he had
lost the Dem primary and said he was considering swithcing parties?
I could go on
and
on
.
She lost my support a long time ago.
Don't these actions count?
I've paid very close attention to her since 2000, when I was a huge fan. She hasn't represented progressives on the most important issues and then she does stuff like flag burning?!
In the end, we all go to our deaths with our own true record of our actions.
Yes, and Bill will have to answer for ruiining Monica's Blew dress too!
It's going to be sad to see the disillusion in this country if Hillary becomes the first female President. Her problem is not that she's a woman... although that's what everyone will blame it on. I had always hoped the first female POTUS would be more worthy of the title and the people's trust.
Yeah, really effective; Why didn't the Clintons say, "You get welfare reform, you give us health care." Did they ever -- ever-- strike a deal that actually furthered a progressive cause? Ever? Show me one.
Are you honestly talking about the true record of our actions? About Bill Clinton? If he had shown personal restraint and truly thought about the American people, Al Gore would have solved global warming by now. So let's talk about taking personal responsibility.
Fully vetted? But not the last 7 years? Are you serious?
I loved and defended the CLintons for years. I thought it was just the Evil Republicans. Now they have embodied the stereotypes. To hear Hillary and McCain talk, what's the difference on foreign policy? She wouldn't vote to ban cluster bombs; she was eerily silent on torture until the Democratic poll numbers forced her hand. After 35 years of "experience", she still though a flag burning amendment would earn her the love of Republicans. She has no real backbone that matters: she's great at defending herself and her family. She's lousy -- lousy at delivering for the American people.
And I want a president who will deliver more to the American people, and be able to rally us in times of crisis, not sit and hide behind her desk "working hard." If you think Hillary -- without any of Bill's political skills -- can deliver anything, you're deluded. And even with Bill's gifts, he squandered them. And he squandered our future by turning the White House over to George Bush.
With the help of safe, solid, 10-point plan candidates like Kerry and Gore (before he found his voice). And it will happen. Again.
I have been insisting that she release her tax returns for months now and her failure to do so is an indication of a complete lack of transparency and probably worse. She is definitely hiding something that could be very disturbing and she has in fact not been fully vetted at all.
Oh yes, you think you've got great power. LOL*
I can see you wagging that finger.
Let's hear why he hasn't given back much more than a pittance of what Rezko gave him.
Then, we'll talk.
Come on, AnninCA. If you have a drop of objectivity in you, you know that Hilary Clinton's instincts for secrecy - even when there was nothing negative in what she resisted revealing - led to problems, if only of perception, during Bill's presidency. Her current position with respect to releasing the tax return is an old movie that is having the same effect. All she need do is release it. Then there would be no bickering about lack of transparency and speculation about what damaging information the return contains. The only possible downside, of course, is that it DOES contain damaging information.
He gave it all to charity. Every God damned dime. And do you really want to open up campaign donations to scrutiny? What about Norman Hsu? I don't think Hillary's returned the million dollars he bundled for her.
By the way, in case facts mean anything to you: the bottom fell out of the Rezko nonsense for Clinton over a week ago: the house deal. The sellers came forward, said Rezko had nothing to do with the selling price. There were a series of offers and counteroffers like any real estate deal, and the sellers got the best price for the house.
If being a Chicago politician, Rezko is the all there is against Obama -- he's a better politican than I imagined.
But if you're going to cherrypick campaign donors, then you'll be fine if we look at HIllary's, past and present, right? And Bill's foundation, because there couldn't be a chance that there's some campaign laundering and conflicts of interest there, right? And the library?
How dare you make the Rezko issue sound as if that is the end-all of all Obama's donors and draw sweeping conclusions. It's this kind of dishonesty that has turned me off of the Clintons. Forever.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
