Bill and Hillary Clinton top list of richest ex-first families

a reply to: neo96

Yeah its always the other parties fault. D@mn party cheerleaders , they are the reason why this country is broken for the average person.

Also I'm no prophet but I think the Obamanuts are going to strike it rich after their POTUS stint. Possibly beating the Clintons.

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: beezzer

With all their money, why would she want the presidency?

That's an odd statement. Do you think people should run for President in the hopes of making millions?

On the contrary.

But under the definition of altruism, I know I wouldn't find a picture of Hillary.

Yeah its always the other parties fault. D@mn party cheerleaders , they are the reason why this country is broken for the average person.

a reply to: interupt42

The reason this country is broken is because the 'majority' looks in the wrong places to solve their 'problems'.

Wrong place is government, and politicians.

There is only one person people can count on, who will never screw them over for a vote, or power or control

And that is the people themselves as in SELF.

As in SELF DETERMINATION.

a reply to: beezzer

You now how sociopaths, (Sociopaths- masters at influence and deception) they can not have enough only thinking to be the leader of one of the most powerful countries in the world will have her salivating every where and I mean every where.

originally posted by: beezzer
On the contrary.

But under the definition of altruism, I know I wouldn't find a picture of Hillary.

What potential major party presidential candidates would you expect to find? Do you think most are altruistic do-gooder's and she's the exception?

a reply to: theantediluvian

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Thats something ?

I NEVER THOUGHT ABOUT, and don't want to know.

What is seen cannot be unseen.

a reply to: neo96

Don't disagree and it sounds good, but not likely to happen anytime soon. The masses have been to distracted to deal with the real problems and the political cheerleaders allow them to keep screwing us over.

The only hope we have for now which is still very unlikely is to take baby steps and at least bring awaraness to the issues at hand. The biggest problem our gov't has right now is the billions it is thrown at them by the industries they are suppose to be overseeing. It is no wonder the lobbying corporations are raking in record profits while the rest of the country caries them on their backs. The gov't is simply working for the highest bidder not the people.

Heck the kind of underwear the president wears and which dog the family picks gets more coverage than the billions that are thrown at our elected officials in office. Its not even on the radar for political debates. They just keep rehashing the same distractions over and over again: Religion,gay marriage, racism, insurance,economy. However they never discuss the real issue or how the regulations are drafted and or edited by the highest bidders and how they are always on the winning side.

a reply to: neo96

Don't kid yourself, all our former presidents and our representatives in the congress and the senate are all multi-millionaires! Just because the Clinton's are at the top of the list, doesn't mean the rest of our political elite are just scraping the barrel. There's a reason our political representatives stay in office well over their retirement ages. Why leave when the money and power is good?

originally posted by: WeRpeons
a reply to: neo96

Don't kid yourself, all our former presidents and our representatives in the congress and the senate are all multi-millionaires! Just because the Clinton's are at the top of the list, doesn't mean the rest of our political elite are just scraping the barrel. There's a reason our political representatives stay in office well over their retirement ages. Why leave when the money and power is good?

I know, but quite the double standard exists.

That's why the rich guy lost last election.

a reply to: xuenchen

ABSOLUTELY INDEED ON ALL COUNTS.

However, she'd run because they told her to . . . and she's been itching to be in the power seat to spew her ruthlessness far and wide . . . and her meanness . . . and her spiteful vengeance . . .

originally posted by: theantediluvian
That puts Bill Clinton in about 9th place for Presidential net worth behind:

George Washington
Thomas Jefferson
Theodore Roosevelt
Andrew Jackson
James Madison
Lyndon Johnson
Herbert Hoover
Franklin D. Roosevelt

and right ahead of JFK who would actually have been top of the list had he not been assassinated.

source

Interesting your source mentions Thomas Jefferson, they contradict themselves. They say TJ was worth 212 million but was mired in debt at the end of his life. Which is it millionaire or debt ridden. I can say TJ owned slaves but couldn't release them because you had to have I think it was 2,500 per slave to release them and he couldn't afford it at the end. At least this is what one of the leading historians say in lectures I have listened to here in VA.

originally posted by: beezzer

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: beezzer

With all their money, why would she want the presidency?

That's an odd statement. Do you think people should run for President in the hopes of making millions?

On the contrary.
But under the definition of altruism, I know I wouldn't find a picture of Hillary.

No she appears a little sooner in the dictionary under Ahole.

So much for Hillary being flat broke!

originally posted by: Elton

originally posted by: beezzer
On the contrary.

But under the definition of altruism, I know I wouldn't find a picture of Hillary.

What potential major party presidential candidates would you expect to find? Do you think most are altruistic do-gooder's and she's the exception?

HAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. . . oh.

You serious?

Perhaps the Libertarian candidate.

Maybe even a Green Party candidate.

But that's about it.

originally posted by: tothetenthpower
a reply to: neo96

Pretty sure Mitt's problem was that he had the Charisma of a fist, not that he was rich...

Who cares how rich they are? It's true they were broke after Bill ended his Presidency, because REPUBLICANS forced him into paying millions of dollars of legal fees to defend himself against a blowjob of all things.

So let's not forget the cause and effect relationship of the circumstances.

`Tenth

It looks like in 2000 he'd had a pretty good handle on getting his legal fees paid for through Donations.

Gifts Help Clintons Pay Off Legal Fees

Published: August 24, 2000
EMAIL
PRINT
With the help of some of the Democratic Party's biggest donors, President Clinton's legal defense fund raised more than $1 million this year. But he and his wife, Hillary, still owe about $4 million in legal fees, fund officials said today.

More bills are expected from Mr. Clinton's fight to keep his law license in Arkansas, and he will continue to face the possibility of indictment after he leaves office for his conduct in his sexual affair with a White House intern.

''In our view, we've come a very long way, but we still have a ways to go,'' said Anthony Essaye, the fund's executive director.

It has raised about $8 million in two and a half years.
Donors giving the $10,000 maximum to the fund this year include Peter B. Angelos, a trial lawyer and owner of the Baltimore Orioles; Harvey Weinstein, co-chairman of Miramax Films; Eli Broad, chairman of the insurance giant SunAmerica; Fred Eychaner, president of the Newsweb Corporation, and Lew Wasserman, chairman emeritus of Universal Studios.

Much of the money for the fund has been raised through direct mail appeals, and 96 percent of the 104,000 contributions received have been $100 or less.

You interested in Donating?
Gifts help the clintons

By 2001 Slick Willie and Scary Hilary were Just Sooooooo Poor!

A CNN analysis of the family's financial records in early 2013 showed that former President Bill Clinton had earned $106 million from paid speeches since leaving the White House in January 2001. In 2012 alone, Bill Clinton earned $17 million in fees.

Linky

See the hypocrisy here....

I thought it was the libs who always were ragging on the rich...

guess not...

Have fun with your star and flag circle jerk

originally posted by: olaru12
See the hypocrisy here....

I thought it was the libs who always were ragging on the rich...

guess not...

Have fun with your star and flag circle jerk

No hypocrisy here really, just pointing out the Truth, Yes, I know that upsets some people.
Because this woman a known liar.

Made a statement to the people, that the Clinton's were Broke when they let the White House and wanted us to believe they couldn't afford the best for their daughter.

So, maybe the next time you see your future POTUS candidate on the street corner give her a dime.

a reply to: neo96

they have earned at least $155 million

Bad at math. What's that ... $31 million a year?

ETA
a reply to: beezzer

With all their money, why would she want the presidency?

I don't think she does. She's going to use the sympathy in loss as cover for their ill-gotten gains.