President Clinton Takes In $10 Million In Speaking Fees

[Catherine Vincent]

He's worth every penny!

President Clinton rakes in $10 million in speaking fees
POSTED: 1718 GMT (0118 HKT), June 14, 2007

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Former President Clinton made more than $10 million in paid speeches last year, according to new filings that show he and his presidential-candidate wife have at least $10 million in the bank, and may have closer to $50 million.

According to financial disclosure forms made public Thursday, Bill and Hillary Rodham Clinton hold two accounts, each valued at somewhere between $5 and $25 million. One is an old-fashioned bank account; the other is a blind trust.

The reports indicate that when it comes to family wealth, Clinton is the wealthiest of the members of Congress running for president. Of all the presidential candidates, only Mitt Romney, whose assets are between $190 million and $250 million, may lay claim to being more affluent.

Most of the presidential candidates serving in the Senate reported income from books. Obama was the most successful, reporting $572,490 in royalties for one book and an advance for a second. Hillary Clinton's own book profits are declining, years after her "Living History" became a best-seller in 2003. She reported royalties of $350,000 for the book last year. Dodd received a $30,000 advance for "Letter from Nuremberg." His father was a prosecutor at the Nuremberg trials of Nazi war criminals.

The reports filed with the Senate by Clinton and McCain list the blind trusts, but don't disclose what is in them.

Former President Clinton upped his speechmaking money from the previous year, garnering some $10.2 million in payments, compared with about $7.5 million the year before.

....more at http://edition.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/06/14/clinton.speech.ap/index.html

[hobbit709]

1. At least Bill can talk for his money

Unlike Raygun who got big bucks for his senile ramblings

[A HERETIC I AM]

2. I find it fascinating that not one single person has commented on his wealth.

Threads excoriating personal wealth are all the rage on DU but not when it comes to President Clinton.

Personally, I think he should charge what ever the market will bear and has every right to make as much money as he can/wants to.

Too many on this message board seem to think making money in the 7 and higher figure range is "obscene" (to quote an oft used phrase) but i can't remember ever seeing such a term used in reference to the income of the former President.

[GeorgeGist]

4. Obscene philosophy you share with the Clintons ...

Personally, I think he should charge what ever the market will bear and has every right to make as much money as he can/wants to.

[A HERETIC I AM]

6. You disagree? Should he charge LESS than what people are willing to pay him?

n/t

[Catherine Vincent]

8. That's just a certain percentage of DUers that think that way.

Now if he received ten million for a single speaking engagement, then that would be obscene. Didn't Reagan received close to that much for a speaking engagement?

[Horse with no Name]

3. Yeah I read this this morning in GDP

the OP attempted to paint this in a bad light.:snicker:
I say the more money they get...the better. I don't care if it is Edwards or Clinton or Obama or the Man on the Moon.
If someone is willing to pay to listen to their message, I see absolutely zilch harm in that.

[Catherine Vincent]

7. I think it's great that he was paid that much.

Especially since the freepers were happy that Clinton had some of his speaking engagements cancelled shortly after he left office because of his pardons. They tried to spin that the pardons was such an evil thing that he did.

Look at him now baby! Take that freepers!

[pepperbear]

5. The question is: did someone else have to be exploited in order for him...

to make 10 mil? Did a war have to take place? Did someone's job get outsourced? Did someone get laid off?

I doubt it, but that's the litmus test for me, and it's the difference between a clinton and a walmart exec.

edited to add other scenarios.