Time: Obama Memo on Clinton Tax Returns

[Heisenberg]

http://thepage.time.com/obama-memo-on-clinton-tax-returns/

TO: Interested Parties

FR: The Obama Campaign

RE: TAX RETURNS: What does Clinton have to hide?

DA: March 5, 2008

The Clinton campaign today maintained that “the vetting of Barack Obama has just begun.” The truth is, more than a year into this campaign, some very simple vetting of Hillary Clinton has yet to start.

In the face of her unwillingness to release her tax returns, Hillary Clinton has made the false case in this campaign that she is more electable because she has been fully vetted. When it comes to her personal finances, Senator Clinton’s refusal to release her taxes returns denies the media and the American people the opportunity to even begin that process. Though her campaign has tried to kick the issue down the road, Democratic voters deserve to know, right now, why it is she is hiding the information in her tax returns from last year.

The Clinton campaign has said that they have released copious amounts of financial information but there are many questions about their private dealings that could be answered in their tax returns but not in the information that is currently available. For example, here are eight pieces of information that could be learned from her tax returns, the accompanying schedules, and attachments:

Effective tax rate – including whether or not any tax shelters were used to reduce it

Amount of income for spouses by source

Amount of stock gains and losses

Gross income for the couple

Amount earned from stock dividends

Amount of household employment taxes paid

Personal exemptions taken

Charitable contributions made

Senator Clinton has also claimed that she is too “busy” to release her tax returns. Given the fact she is able to loan her campaign $5 million, you would think the Clintons would be able to hire an accountant. The reality is that she wants to keep this information hidden from voters. The people of Wyoming, Mississippi, Pennsylvania and the rest of the country should wonder why.

The Clintons’ record on releasing tax returns:

FEBRUARY 2008: Clinton Reiterated That She Would Not Release Her Tax Records Until She Is The Nominee And Not Before Mid-April. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton says she won’t release her tax returns until she has the Democratic presidential nomination in hand, and not before tax filing time comes in mid-April. “I will release my tax returns,” Clinton said during the debate. “I have consistently said I will do that once I become the nominee, or even earlier.” Pressed about the timing of releasing her tax returns, campaign aides were more reticent Wednesday, indicating that Clinton would not release the sensitive financial data during a hotly contested primary, but only at tax filing time. [AP, 2/27/08 <http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1717644,00.html> ]

JUNE 2007: Clinton Does Not Plan to Release Her Tax Returns Until Next Year. According to the Washington Post, Clinton said through a spokesman that, “like past presidential candidates,” she will “release tax information in the election year.” [Washington Post <http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/18/AR2007061801452.html> , 6/19/07]

APRIL 12, 1996: Clinton Released His Tax Returns. President Clinton and his wife earned $316,074 in 1995, including the president’s $200,000 salary, according to tax returns released Friday by the White House. The public release of the tax returns, three days before the April 15 filing deadline, shows that Clinton and first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton are owed a refund of $5,656 on the $81,093 they paid in taxes, and will apply that refund to their 1996 income taxes. [uPI, 4/12/96]

April 15, 1992: Bill Clinton Made His Tax Returns Public. APRIL 15, 1992: Bill Clinton made his tax returns made public. [Los Angeles Times, 4/16/93]

Bill Clinton Released His Tax Returns In 1992 But Refused To Release Their Tax Returns From Before 1980. During the 1992 campaign, the Clintons claimed to be coming clean by releasing their tax returns from 1980 forward. But they steadfastly refused to release their returns for prior years, and only later did we learn that 1978 and 1979 were the tax years when Mrs. Clinton reported her 10,000% cattle-futures trading profit. [WSJ, 2/22/08 http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120364037189484545.html?mod=opinion_main_review_and_outlooks

[Duckus]

Interesting. Though not a huge fan of wanting to see her records it is a smart issue to attack. The policy differences are small so things like this work well.

Issues like this play into his "openness" that he talks about in speeches. The need for transparency in government. I think that message is powerful for people, so this attack works with that well.

Seems he is ready to fight back. I hope he keeps it clean.......

[ECU-ALUM]

After last night this could be called "The Obama Strikes Back!"

[DjTj]

After last night this could be called "The Obama Strikes Back!"

No ... the first part of the campaign was "A New Hope." Last week was "The Clinton Empire Strikes Back." Now, we're moving into the "Return of the Jedibama" phase of the campaign. I hopes there's Ewoks in this one.

[MDRedskinsFan]

Republicans have always accused the Clintons of hiding things, and they've for the most part slid through the cracks. Fact is, even though I am not an Obama supporter, I have no choice but to admire the way he is putting the pressure on the Clintons. He is a very intelligent man, and should not stop until she releases her tax records.

Some people may say this isn't a big issue because it has nothing to do with their policies, but it has everything to do with this election. They have always been reluctant in releasing any personal information, and it makes you wonder why it takes so long to release the information.

My take? I think the Clintons still have some stuff to hide from the failed Whitewater investment, and are probably working on ways right now of how to go about hiding any income that may show up as a result of that. And it makes you wonder, having been caught once before in that sting, whether or not they're in any illegal financial dealings as we speak, and are looking to cover them up. Her "busy" remark is a coverup to get folks off their trail while her lawyers look to cover her.

It's either this, or that releasing her income records would contradict her whole message about being able to fight for middle-class America when her salary is well into the 6 figures. Either way, this issue is a lose-lose topic for the Clintons, and it always has been.

[ECU-ALUM]

No ... the first part of the campaign was "A New Hope." Last week was "The Clinton Empire Strikes Back." Now, we're moving into the "Return of the Jedibama" phase of the campaign. I hopes there's Ewoks in this one.

:laugh: :applause: Now that you mention it....I am surprised I never noticed how much Hillary and The Emporer look alike.

[Fergasun]

Obama is going to be dealing with attacks from Republicans and Hillary right now. You'd think it would make any voter pause and wonder what everyone is so afraid of. I think the Obama attacks are fair, but I'm getting sick of hearing them day-after-day.

I hope he provides some solid answers re: Rezco, or else he'll start to look like no change at all. That's a simplified analysis... but man..

[Air Force Cane]

Go Get her Obama!!

This really is just a miracle to have both liberals beating the snot out of each other for the next six months. Brokered convention, exhaustion, mistakes, bankrupt after more elections in Florida and Pennsylvania.

Without this civil war the media would never cover any of the scandal and corruption. And Obama or Hillary would have waltzed into the White House.

Now the media is going to be out for blood like sharks circling a shipwreck.

This is going to be SO AWESOME. As a McCain fan- I thank you for posting such illustrative memos. Taking a real page out of the reviled "Karl Rove playbook".

How does it feel?!!

[Duckus]

Obama is going to be dealing with attacks from Republicans and Hillary right now. You'd think it would make any voter pause and wonder what everyone is so afraid of. I think the Obama attacks are fair, but I'm getting sick of hearing them day-after-day.

I hope he provides some solid answers re: Rezco, or else he'll start to look like no change at all. That's a simplified analysis... but man..

I agree, he needs to get much better at providing some solid answers.

I think with Rezco he is in a hard place - he has said that is was stupid, it was wrong and he regrets doing any sort of business with the man. I am not sure if he actually knows any of the details regarding this, because if he did you would be sure he would be more in the trail, which he is not.

The thing that I find interesting is that if there WAS more of a connection the media would have found it already. That is what they do. They find it and I can bet you anything political operatives and every media company in the country has looked into this over the past two months. They didn't find anything when they looked - or at least no one has said anything. Which would be kind of silly. So instead of finding anything they just ask him over and over again to try and make HIM create the story from a slip or mistake or shaky answer. I am not sure he can say anymore than he already has, but what he can do is formulate what he said better so it does not sound so lame.

[Air Force Cane]

I think the Obama attacks are fair, but I'm getting sick of hearing them day-after-day.

I hope he provides some solid answers re: Rezco, or else he'll start to look like no change at all. That's a simplified analysis... but man..

Welcome to Reality Man!! Obama is nothing more than a liberal hack politician from Chicago. Think about it- what has he actually DONE in his life other than simply BEING Barack Obama?!!

When the Obamanation finally realizes he is not the Messiah and will not lead them to nirvana-

there will be even more liberals going to psychiatrists than when President Bush won in 2004!!

[PeterMP]

IMO, I wouldn't have done this. There isn't enough to make it stick w/o making him look bad for going negative.

If he's going to go in this direction, he needs to make sure there is something there.

[HOF44]

Taking a real page out of the reviled "Karl Rove playbook".

If they were really taking a page from the Rove Playbook, they would not only have asked for the release of the records there would be un-named sources indicating there was income from pro NAFTA Governments and some middle eastern interests also. Probably a few other rumors to boot.

[Duckus]

IMO, I wouldn't have done this. There isn't enough to make it stick w/o making him look bad for going negative.

If he's going to go in this direction, he needs to make sure there is something there.

I think he can do it without making it look "negative"

He can talk and do speeches about transparency in government. Being open, having eveyting out on the table. And he can easily say that Hillary is not following this idea and would lead to more secrecy, such as the Bush administration.

He could swing it as not being negative, even though he is attacking. It will be interesting to see either way where this goes and how it works.

[Fergasun]

I agree, he needs to get much better at providing some solid answers.

I think with Rezco he is in a hard place - he has said that is was stupid, it was wrong and he regrets doing any sort of business with the man. I am not sure if he actually knows any of the details regarding this, because if he did you would be sure he would be more in the trail, which he is not.

I'm not familiar with what he said in the past. The thing is, that now he has a big opening to putting all of this Rezco business behind him. Don't know exactly what happened this week but he didn't answer the Chicago paper directly and now they are out for blood. They put their phone number up and said, "Obama, please call us!". I don't find that really great behavior by a newspaper. But now that everyone is listening he can either give an awesome answer that shut's everyone up, or he'll stumble and keep the spotlight on Rezco.