Talk about "the Audacity of Hope" - taking a "reported" figure for "disentangling" and imputing to that the value of "holdings" requires quite a leap, closing your eyes to the gaping chasm in between. Don't look down.

Let's work backwards. If the values of Bill's "holdings" (i.e., secured interest - stock or bonds or unexpired options) were significantly higher than what Hillary claimed on the dates she filed the Senate reports, it would eventually bite her in the ass even if she won the Presidency - and might well come out before the election and cause her defeat. She is very unlikely to have misstated them by so much.

The "reported" money Bill MIGHT get could be in the form of deferred compensation, some sort of contractual "golden parachute" which might just be a legal way of Burkle rewarding his old pal. With his money, Burkle has more lawyers working on loopholes than a dog has fleas.

The time to have worried about the relationship between the Clintons and Burkle was in the early '90s, when it might have saved us some grief.

larkin, were you just purposefully blind during the 90's? those of us who were paying attention have seen this before and saw this coming for the past 10 years. it's amazing how nobody on the left complained about clinton (either on of them) til the shoe was on the other foot. morons.

oh...and we told you so.

Larkin: "The laughable excuse that they keep offering is that her taxes won't be done until April 15."

Boy, I hadn't read that - that Clinton was using that excuse for not releasing her past income tax returns until April 15. Do you have a link, or did you make that up?

ABC News:

Sen. Hillary Clinton has offered little explanation for why she has delayed releasing the tax returns made public by most other Democratic presidential candidates in recent years.

"What is the holdup?" said Sheila Krumholz of the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonprofit group that tracks the role of money in politics. "She hasn't exactly made it clear as to what process is making it so cumbersome to just release them."

The ABC question matches what I've read, that Clinton hasn't explained why, so I'd love to see your source on your claim as to her excuse, Larkin.

and... on the subject of vetting - has Obama answered all of the questions posed to him about the indicted Tony Rezko yet?

Nope.

What his timeline for that?

Boy, I hadn't read that - that Clinton was using that excuse for not releasing her past income tax returns until April 15. Do you have a link, or did you make that up?

I saw that on Tucker Carlson where one of her campaign people was asking Tucker if had finished his taxes yet in response to his question about why she hadn't released hers. It's that fat, blonde woman that often appears on TV, but I can't recall her name.

So, you're suggesting that April 15 just came out of nowhere and that it has no correlation with the fact that is the filing deadline for 2007 taxes?

Hillary's the one who chose that date. Let her defend it. It's obvious what she's trying to imply by using April 15.

larkin, were you just purposefully blind during the 90's?

You wouldn't have found me defending the Clintons during that time period. I voted for Ross Perot in '92 and Bob Dole in '96. The Clinton's fast and loose approach to ethical issues always bothered me, but I admit I only started to dig in when they started sliming Barack Obama.

fair enough. but it sure surprises me how many on the left are just now seeing what a manipulative team the clintons are.

by the way, i gotta ask why you voted for ross perot in '92? i just never got his appeal. he also seemed a little unhinged to me, and with a very limited range of competency.

I have also never voted for either Clinton, and was very critical of the former president when he was in office. I never cared very much about the adultery (other people's marriages are their own business), but there were a lot of fishy things going on in the Clinton house, especially with finances. I'm now interested in what's been going on since they left the White House, and how many favors Senator Clinton will be expected to pay back to her husbands associates.

The left's love affair with the Clintons has always been overstated by the right, and has only seemed greater than it really is in comparison to their feelings about the current president.

"So, you're suggesting that April 15 just came out of nowhere and that it has no correlation with the fact that is the filing deadline for 2007 taxes?

Hillary's the one who chose that date. Let her defend it. It's obvious what she's trying to imply by using April 15.

No, where did I suggest that?

I suspect they want to release it all at once, not some now and some later, and I suspect that whatever is in there is going to be subject to a lot of criticism and spin, and by waiting as long as possible they are limiting the amount of ??? and spin going into Pennsylvania, which is one week later.

by the way, i gotta ask why you voted for ross perot in '92?

It was more of a protest vote against the choices we were given. Early on, I had a visceral distrust of Bill Clinton. I was pulling for Tsongas on the Democratic side.

And I really thought George H. W. Bush had lost touch when it came to domestic matters such as the economy.

I suspect they want to release it all at once, not some now and some later, and I suspect that whatever is in there is going to be subject to a lot of criticism and spin

Originally she wasn't going to release until after the Democratic nomination process was complete. Now she's moved it up to April 15 which won't give people enough time to track down all of her sources of income by the April 22 Pennsylvania primary.

So now I think we just have to keep pressuring her until she release them. After all, why wait on tax returns that are already completed (2006 and prior).