« Don't Forget About The UADs: The Orange Scenario | Main | Clinton Raises At Least $3m In 24 Hours » A Note On Clinton's Tax Returns06 Mar 2008 10:57 am They will be released before the Pennsylvania primary on April 22. Probably on or about April 15. ** Update: colleague Andrew Sullivan walked across the hall to inform me, quite reasonably, that really is no explanantion for the Clintons' not having released their tax returns for the past eight years. Comments (58)
Do Wyoming and Mississippi voters not count? Release them now and be done with it. 
on or 'about' April 15th...uh huh.. does that mean April 21st at midnight.
But WHY not now? Why? It's so lame. Release 'em now. Why the wait? Aren't things only going to get more busy the closer we get to April 22? I just don't understand why they can't release them now unless they're trying to pull some sleight of hand on the 15th.
Why not 2006 returns?
I don't understand why not now? Any chance they could be cooking the books?
Anyone know if we are talking about returns just for this year or whether they are planning to disclose returns from previous years? One media strategy that may be in play here is to delay and stonewall on releasing the return as long as possible, but when the return is finally released make sure it contains nothing all that damaging. If managed right that could take the pressure off long enough for the nomination to become a fait accompli, even if there is never any effective disclosure of where Bill has made his millions.
Tax returns for: 2001
Obama already has released his 2007 returns -- Clinton needs to release these now. She also is witholding her and Bill's 2006 returns. Anyone know whether they have made their other "post-presidential" returns -- from 2000 to 2005 -- public?
Yeah, I don't mind looking at last year's returns -- she can go ahead and release them now, and I'll take the 2007 return on April 15. Or April 22. Whenever. I really don't understand why the campaign thinks they can get away with this. This issue isn't going away, and "I don't have time" isn't much of an excuse. Bill has time to grease big-time uranium deals in countries I can't spell, so he can probably sit down at the kitchen table and get this thing cranked out.
"On or about"??? They'll be released no earlier than 4/23.
Marc - can you provide more information on exactly what will be released on April 15? My understanding is that there are several years of tax returns that have yet to be released to the public. Obama released his, why has Clinton stalled? Please find the answers!
This isn't about 2007 returns, which don't need to be filed until 4/15 - this is about their prior returns - I think every one since Bill left office. These are just sitting in a filing cabinet somewhere. Release them now. Also, how about a list of the Clinton Library donors while we are at it?
Leo, it's 2000-2007, the post-WH years. (As others have said, I'll happily take 2000-2006 now and 2007 April 15th.) At this point the question is less what's in the returns. It's why did they prefer to create the appearance of a scandal? That is just a laughably tone-deaf strategy. When you stuff something behind your back and loudly announce "This? Why, it's nothing. Nothing at all. I'll let you see after you sign that form committing yourself to support me no matter what I do." It's just ridiculous, and a potent reminder of their management of potential scandals in the WH in the 90s.
Agree with PhillyDog. You're a political reporter, Marc. You need to push on this -- not just pass along Wolfson's info as an FYI.
My best guess, which is worth less than 2 cents, is that the returns will be somewhat bulky and be released late on the Friday or early Monday before the PA primary. This will not give much time to really peruse them and be able to challenge anything in them so it won't hurt her in PA and only afterwards. Since the next couple of primaries favor Obama, by the time she is in a primary where they will have matttered it will be old news.
If the clintons can't get you their tax returns, why should we entrust them with the federal budget? I wonder if they are being doctored and scrubbed as we speak...if the clintons released altered tax returns, would there be any way to verify?
Reasons why "WJC/HRC Tax Returns" may be a process story, but still has legs: 1) Obama did it, why can't you? After the cloak-and-dagger Bush/Cheney years, people don't want a President or Presidential candidate who isn't open and honest with them, particularly about something they can relate to. In March & April, people can relate to tax returns. This also plays into the aura/meme of shadiness that can surround the Clintons from time to time. 2) People will assume that she has something to hide. Otherwise, why wouldn't she make the returns public? This isn't the kind of thing with which people will be lining up to give her the benefit of the doubt. 3) Is it that people may have donated to the WJC Library expecting something in return from a HRC Presidency? This doesn't seem unrealistic. In other words, it's not hard to connect-the-dots in the public mind. 4) The MSM will be starved for stories between now and April 22 (Pennsylvania). And the Obama campaign, along with his netroots support, are happy to talk about this. It can be done in a way that doesn't seem like a sleazy, desperate departure from the "Politics of Hope," as well. 5) She's trying to be the candidate that's been "vetted." This doesn't comport with that. 6) Hillaryland doesn't have a good answer for the question yet, and when they do, it will be coming from the mouth of Howard Wolfson, who could sound like a weasel reading the Holy Bible.
Marc, as a reporter, you should really be pushing harder for these. It's utterly out of hand that she's not released them. This is not a hard thing to do. They exist, they can be released. It doesn't make any sense that this should take so long. It only indicates that they have something they're hiding -- which should make reporters hunt further and insist further -- not back off! Don't back off!
BTW, I wouldn't be surprised if there is nothing necessarily bad in the returns. They didn't need them prior to last Tuesday because they had NAFTA-Gate already set up. If they release them just before the PA primary and they are mostly innocuous, they can say, "See, nothing there." And play the victim card again.
This is the way the Clintons ALWAYS are. Even on those rare occasions where they have nothing to hide, they make it appear as though they are hiding something. What do they have to hide in their tax returns? Is it simply the amount of income, which might make them less palatable to the "little people" to whom Hillary is pitching her "I'm a fighter" theme? Or is the source of some of Bill's (or even Hillary's) income that is the problem? These people are not the least bit transparent, in anything they do. Why should we trust them with our government, yet again?
Outrageous. If this was Obama it would be all anyone was talking about for the past few months. Outrageous.
This is a really silly story. Do you really think she hasn't been planning to run for last 7 years? of course she has. that being said they always knew they'd have to report/release the returns. She's a senator so she knows she has a higher threshold.
Also, that $5 million self-loan from her and Bill's joint accounts was totally part of the plan.
Marc, if you're on more conference calls, it'd be worth pursuing that line--They obviously have the 2000-2006 returns available, so why the insistence on creating the appearance of a scandal? What possible goal is served? Not simply "Where are they" but "Why on earth do you want to make it look like there's something to hide? What does this say about the transparency of a Clinton White House?"
My best guess: the returns show that the Clintons got (wholly legal) advantageous tax treatment on Bill's hedge fund income, which cuts against the things Clinton has been saying on the campaign trail about the unfairly favorable treatment that hedge fund managers get.
"Marc, if you're on more conference calls, it'd be worth pursuing that line--They obviously have the 2000-2006 returns available, so why the insistence on creating the appearance of a scandal? Posted by Deborah" I agree. It's absurd for obama and his surrogates in the "liberal media" to be screaming for Hillary’s full tax returns when obama hasn’t released his full tax returns. One can only think they lead to rezko.
The strategy is to release them close enough to the PA election that the information contained in them can't affect the primary. I'm sure there's plenty of interesting tidbits there, such as how much the Clintons make from Dubai, etc. But it will take a couple days or so to be interpreted and written up, and then it will take a week longer than that to filter down into the lower-income, lower-education working class voters of PA. If she releases them RIGHT BEFORE PA, she can claim transparency without hurting her chances there.
hadenough have you been sniffing the glue again?
again, you're simply "reporting" this as if it's news, and not challenging it, therefore giving it credence as something that should be unassailable. This IS NOT what a reporter should be doing. I repost my comment from yesterday: Marc: I wish you would challenge statements and spin more. It seems to me that's what a journalist/columnist/pundit is supposed to do. We can all get the press releases directly from the campaigns. "Their tax returns since they left the White House will be made available on or around April 15." What possible reason could they have to not release 6 years of back tax info before April 15? The fact that that question (not even that worded that specifically) is an Obama campaign talking point SHOULD NOT preclude you and other reporters from asking it. It is a basic point of factual inquiry. To do their jobs properly, reporters need not only to report the spin, but IGNORE that same spin and ask the plainly necessary questions, of both sides. NOTE: and I don't mean it would have to be right then, on the call. It can happen as a follow up to Wolfson or his deputy, and it can be posted publicly here, as a question awaiting comment.
Everyone in the Senate and House has released all of their tax records except for 2007. Everyone has not filed 2007, yet.
Stewart: those are not tax returns, they are financial disclosure forms. They don't have the same details.
Marc: your excellent colleague points out the painfully obvious: "Their current position - that they will release their returns around April 15 - is also bizarre. Did they file an extension for the past few years? If they didn't, the forms are available now. Throwing strange arbitrary future deadlines around is unacceptable flim flam."
stenography is EXCELLENT NEWS!! FOR HILLARY!!!
April 15, 2009. See, it all depends on what the definition of "April 15" is...
Read the "Update" in this post from Matthew Ygelias's. Apparently Double Standard Hillary had a whole lot to say about the need for releasing tax returns when she ran against Rick Lazio for her Senate seat. This attitude is what has shifted me from the view "I prefer Obama" to "no way I'm voting for Hillary". She simply reminds me too much of the current crop of Republicans. I want better and if better isn't one of my choices, I'm not voting for the evil of two lessers.
The Clinton campaign must be constantly asked to release their tax returns and the White House papers. Every day they must be asked. Until they are released journalists must challenge the notion that the Clintons have been vetted. They make a claim about themselves that is simply impossible to verify without full disclosure. They need to be challenged daily until they disclose. In the absence of disclosure, there must be continued and sustained speculation as to why they refuse.
So as long as Hillary won't release her tax returns, I'm free to speculate as to why. So here goes. How about this. Maybe Bill has business deals with foreign governments, or corporations closely linked to foreign governments, which pose national security questions. Have we ever had a president whose spouse was financially in bed with a foreign government? Dubai? Kazakhstan? Were they really buying his business expertise, or making an investment in controlling American policy in the future? Or how about this. Maybe they have made so much money so fast, in the last 2 years, that there is no way they were actually earning the money, making it very clear that some very wealthy people have simply been transferring massive amounts of money to the Clintons. Why would they do that? Pre-buying some pardons? Making an investment in controlling American policy? Circumventing campaign finance laws that prohibit individuals from making $5 million donations to Hillary, but permit them to give the money to the Clintons, so that Hillary can "loan" it to herself? My guess: both of these, and more.
To Jeff Larson: the Clintons can get away with whatever the press lets them get away with! Like ROve, they pre-emptively attack the press that they are treated unfailry, and the press backs down AND covers that "story" as news. Why is the press not "Pressing" on this (i.e. the 2001 to 2006 returns - transparancy that can be "xeroxed") - as well as the library donations? have we all forgotten the pardons-for-library gift of Mark Rich, and where is the outrage of Bill's Kazakhstan and Saudi and Dubai links - with autocrats on the state dep. list for human rights violations!? If we don;t talk about it now, this is what we will be talking about for the next few months......
I think this IS about the Library funds. As long as Hillary is holding back on the tax returns, that's the story, and that's what everyone is demanding to know about. By holding out on the tax returns, they're making that into the story. And there may well be no "there" there. Karl Rove playbook: change the subject. Then, after the returns are finally released, when folks start asking why the library donors list was never released they can say "Look, we released the tax returns, and there was nothing. Stop badgering us about these niggling little financial details and go back to badgering Obama about Rezko!"
If I'm not mistaken, the Clinton campaign has said only that it will release tax "information," not tax returns. So what we see may be heavily redacted.
So, the Democratic primary is a sneak preview, a peek into next year's X-rated White House TV reality show. There’s an undeniable sense of déjà vu, as the Clinton players return to the White House. It’ll be an encore performance. With each action packed episode, the old scandals make way for the new. There’ll be eight years to catch-up, beginning with the missing tax returns, followed by Buddy the dog, who incidentally like others, have met with unforeseeable circumstances, which prevent their return for the sequel: http://theseedsof9-11.com
It really took Andy walking across the hall for you to figure this out?? Christ, what do they pay you?? And Andy for that matter? They have released NOTHING since 1999. I fully understand it is not a requirement, but neither is kissing babies. It is simply done. Every day she does not release the returns is a day that the MSM is not able to do their job in helping to vet our candidate for President.
I can understand the Clintons wanting to release all of the returns together and not have two dumps - the past ones one day and then the 2007 information later. But surely they can get their 2007 taxes prepared in a few days or less and get them all out there at one time. No need to wait 6 more weeks. I agree she needs to be asked about this every day until they come out.
Tax returns??? We ain't got no tax returns!
Why not now? Did somebody already ask this? No matter. I'll ask it again. Why not now? Will journalists on the campaign trail ask this question? Until they do, and until they get an answer AND until the taxes are released, then let them not regurgitate her claim that she is vetted and Obama is not.
Well guys, it takes awhile to cook the books, and to have a pro. job done at it takes having some people in yoru pocket. I guess April 15th is better late than never, but there will be no suprises being that the CLintons are pros at breaking the law, lying and getting away with it. "It depends on what our definition of " is" is."
Well guys, it takes awhile to cook the books, and to have a pro. job done at it takes having some people in yoru pocket. I guess April 15th is better late than never, but there will be no suprises being that the CLintons are pros at breaking the law, lying and getting away with it. "It depends on what our definition of " is" is."
I just heard Tim Russert and Andrea Mitchell suggests that the Clintons may just release 2007 returns, where Bill didn't earn nearly as much, or may have cleaned up his act. Is there anyone who knows if they are going to release all the forms (2000 on)? Is there anyway to fight this?
Maybe I am a cynic, but the mere fact that they are holding them (tax returns) back is evidence that they may use it to lay the final blow to the Obama campaign.
Prediction: On or about the 15th, she will only release the 2007 returns, the ones that are due then. Like what the meaning of "is" is, she'll claim she never said she'd release *all* her returns then. So there will remain a gap between the ones she released when running for senate and now, the 2001-2006 returns will remain out of public view. My guess is she will go back to the previous stance of not releasing them before getting the nomination and will try to get away with that... and if, by some long-shot chance, she gets the nomination, she probably still won't produce them, on the basis that McCain hasn't and probably won't produce his. She can say "I'll produce mine if McCain produces his," and they'll wink to each other as neither of them has to release. (BTW, she made her opponent's failure to release tax returns an issue in her 2000 Senate race.)
take a look at you tube. Bill and Hillary completely railroaded a contributor back in 2000
take a look at you tube. Bill and Hillary completely railroaded a contributor back in 2000
There are serious Questions lurking in her undisclosed tax returns from 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005 and 2006. We can give her time for 2007 - and I'm sure she'll file for an extension past 4/15 - but we should put IMMENSE pressure on her to fully disclose her tax records that are already filed and just need to be copied and distributed to the press. What are you hiding Hillary? http://www.jabberwonk.com/flinker.cfm?cliid=17n46p
Release 2001 - 2006 NOW! Release Clinton Library donation information NOW! Release FULL information about Clinton pardons NOW! What is she hiding? If we don't see this NOW, we'll see it in the fall!
Sen. Obama jut released his 2000-2006 at the same time her people was complaining that he had only released 2000... even though The Clinton's haven't released anything as of yet. Abd is she releasing parts or is she going to release her actual Tax Returns? I read something that made it seem that she agreed to release her info... but the way it was worded was like it's not the actual Filings. Now that would just be DIRTY!
Are the fat cats who paid Bill Clinton $250,000 for his one-hour speeches the same folks who so generously contributed to Hillary's campaign and, of late, are trying to intimidate Democrats in the Senate into giving her the advantage? Are the small $25-$100 contributions she's now receiving from working class folks coming from them individually or channeled through them by the same fat cats into her campaign? (Recall the postal carrier who contributed $50,000 though he earns only $40,000) Are the $10.2 million the Clintons contributed to their non-profit foundation being forwarded to charitable organizations, as required, or secretly siphoned off by Hillary’s to cover camping expenses? Did Hillary earn the standard 10%-20% royalty for her ghost-written autobiography or did she bypass a publisher and kept all the profit for herself? And if she published and marketed the book herself, where did she get money? When the book came out in 2003 the Clintons wouldn’t have had the means to risk such a venture. Since in her outreach to college students daughter Chelsea refuses to discuss the Monica Lewinski scandal, perhaps she could answer some those questions about her parent’s finances. Or is this none of their business as well? Carlos Navarro
LIKE ABOUT 40% OF ALL AMERICANS SHE PROBABLY HAS FILED YET. SHE DOSE HAVE UNTL APRIL 15TH WITHOUT EXTENSIONS THAT IS COMING TO HER LIKE TO ALL AMERICANS IF THEY APPLY. AND I AM NOT EVEN A SUPPORTER
|
Subscribe to this blog by Email Twitter || On Facebook || QIK Live Channel  Recent Posts
Monthly Archives
|
Copyright © 2009 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved.
| 
Why not now?!?
Posted by neilrlca | March 6, 2008 11:00 AM