Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 06-10-2014, 09:33 AM
 
23,838 posts, read 23,127,661 times
Reputation: 9409

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge View Post
Mental gymnastics. You are the one twisting and bending over backwards.

Did the Clinton's debts exceed their assets in 2001?

The answer is yes.

That means they were broke when they left the White House.

They did have options available to them to deal with the debt. And eventually paid it off.
I feel sorry for you folks. I really do. Because what you're doing is attempting to prop up Hillary Clinton as she twists and contorts herself into someone who can relate to the average American. This is a complete FARCE. How many average Americans.....who really ARE broke....have at their disposal millions of dollars in cash flows to pay off their "debts" in a matter of days and weeks and months??? Not many. And yet here you are trying to defend this woman as she tries to parlay her indebtedness into something that Americans can relate to?

This is why you folks can't be reasoned with. You offer absolutely nothing logical or anything that remotely approaches reality. It's a cult and you willfully submit to it. It's embarrassing and quite frankly is unbecoming of anyone who expects to have their views respected.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-10-2014, 09:37 AM
 
42,732 posts, read 29,884,155 times
Reputation: 14345
Quote:
Originally Posted by AeroGuyDC View Post
I feel sorry for you folks. I really do. Because what you're doing is attempting to prop up Hillary Clinton as she twists and contorts herself into someone who can relate to the average American. This is a complete FARCE. How many average Americans.....who really ARE broke....have at their disposal millions of dollars in cash flows to pay off their "debts" in a matter of days and weeks and months??? Not many. And yet here you are trying to defend this woman as she tries to parlay her indebtedness into something that Americans can relate to?

This is why you folks can't be reasoned with. You offer absolutely nothing logical or anything that remotely approaches reality. It's a cult and you willfully submit to it. It's embarrassing and quite frankly is unbecoming of anyone who expects to have their views respected.
Whatever.

Did their debts exceed their assets when they left the White House?

Yes or no?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2014, 09:39 AM
 
Location: PNW
455 posts, read 598,479 times
Reputation: 1100
Watching the liberals in this thread trying to defend Pantsuit McCankles is hilarious yet slightly disturbing and scary.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2014, 09:40 AM
 
23,838 posts, read 23,127,661 times
Reputation: 9409
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge View Post
Whatever.

Did their debts exceed their assets when they left the White House?

Yes or no?
No. Absolutely not. Because banks absolutely consider projected income in their lending decisions. Which means they were never "dead broke." Broke people don't get mortgages. Broke people don't get multi-million dollar loans for multiple houses. And this does not even account for the fact that not a single bank on the planet would reject Bill and Hillary Clinton's application for funding merely because of their star power and projected incomes due to that star power.

Fundamental disingenuousness. Why are you engaging in it?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2014, 09:41 AM
 
26,500 posts, read 15,079,792 times
Reputation: 14655
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge View Post
Yes, during 2001 they made a lot of money.

And at the beginning of 2001 their debts exceeded their assets, therefore they were broke.

I'm not a sheep. I'm stating the facts. They were broke at the beginning of 2001. They didn't pay off all those debts until 2004.

No matter how many income tax returns you post, the fact that they were broke at the beginning of 2001, when they left the White House will not change.
You sincerely believe that a sitting US Senator married to a mostly popular former US President "struggled" to get by making roughly $1,000,000.00 in today's money every 17 days on average?

Yes, that is correct. They were barely getting by, averaging $1,000,000.00 in income every 17 days.

By the end of the year of not doing well and struggling like a 99%er, they had over $33,500,000.00 in total assets after subtracting debt in today's dollars.

And by the way, they got free healthcare, free office space, free transportation, free....

OH and December 2000, the month before they left the White House, Hillary got an $8,000,000.00 ADVANCE on her book...OR 11 Million in today's dollars.

I can imagine poor Hillary, wearing her potato sack as the only clothes she had, cashing in that $11,000,000 check as she fought tooth and nail against her family's poverty.

http://www.nytimes.com/2000/12/16/ny...ar-record.html


Oh Hillary, the cross that you carry, your year of purgatory in wretched economic misery and toil, we love you even more for it!







P.S. In regards to your irrelevant comment of: "They didn't pay off all those debts until 2004." Warren Buffet's company still owes a Billion Dollars - $1,000,000,000 - in back taxes dating back over a decade, I am sure you think that he and his company aren't doing well either with that kind of debt hanging over their heads.

Last edited by michiganmoon; 06-10-2014 at 10:02 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2014, 09:45 AM
 
42,732 posts, read 29,884,155 times
Reputation: 14345
Quote:
Originally Posted by AeroGuyDC View Post
No. Absolutely not. Because banks absolutely consider projected income in their lending decisions. Which means they were never "dead broke." Broke people don't get mortgages. Broke people don't get multi-million dollar loans for multiple houses. And this does not even account for the fact that not a single bank on the planet would reject Bill and Hillary Clinton's application for funding merely because of their star power and projected incomes due to that star power.

Fundamental disingenuousness. Why are you engaging in it?
Spin much?

Their debt exceeded their assets. Plain and simple. Undeniable.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2014, 10:07 AM
 
3,971 posts, read 4,040,764 times
Reputation: 5402
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge View Post
Hilarious.

When they left the White House, their debts exceeded their assets. That they anticipated paying off those debts within a few years does not mean that they weren't "broke" when they left the White House.

Speaking the truth isn't "low".
If you only tally up the value of the items they took from the White House alone, there is no way one could be considered "dead broke".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2014, 10:22 AM
 
Location: Staten Island, NY
6,476 posts, read 7,324,646 times
Reputation: 7026
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wayland Woman View Post
How quickly we forget. The impeachment cost the Clinton's a lot of money in legal fees.
Nobody's fault 'cept Bubba's.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2014, 10:29 AM
 
17,401 posts, read 11,978,162 times
Reputation: 16155
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dale Cooper View Post
Oh, my. On this morning's preview, Diane asks her about her financial worth, with it being well into the millions and millions. Poor, downtrodden Hillary says when they left the white house they were dead broke and deeply in debt.

Laughable.
Just one of the regular folk. Struggling to pay that mortgage on the mansion and the Ivy League education for their daughter.....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2014, 10:30 AM
 
6,500 posts, read 6,037,907 times
Reputation: 3603
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge View Post
Spin much?

Their debt exceeded their assets. Plain and simple. Undeniable.
Do you realize how pathetic and dumb you look trying to defend her?
Seek help. Or a place on her campaign staff so you can serve your new master (Obama replacement?) daily.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:31 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top