I’m not sure why Anthony Weiner’s electronic persona remains front-page news, but apparently the New York Times thinks that he merits it, e.g., “Anthony Weiner’s Latest Sexting Scandal: Here’s What We Know”. This sparked a Facebook discussion about a Boston Globe Story: “Huma Abedin separating from Anthony Weiner after scandal”. Here’s what one Facebooker said about this: “I’m guessing the reason she has not left him before now is that she could end up paying alimony and child support since he has been a stay at home dad, and he could end up with most of the custody. Now with the child in one of his creepy pictures she has more leverage.”
Under New York family law, a judge would try to pick a winner parent and park the cash-yielding child with the winner for approximately 83 percent of the time. The loser parent would babysit every other weekend and pay all of the bills for both the child and the winner parent. Thus Huma Abedin would be at risk of losing one third of her after-tax income, in addition to her status as an actual parent, in the event that Weiner won the “I was a stay-at-home dad and want to continue the voluntary arrangement via court order” sweepstakes.
I’m not sure what to make of this. Even before the latest scandal broke it didn’t seem likely that Weiner could have prevailed in the winner-take-all battle that New York law sets up for separating parents. What’s more interesting to me is that these two are apparently about the best that American society can produce, one having been elected to Congress and the other being a top aide to the spouse of the former leader. Weiner can’t find discreet sexual partners in New York City. Huma Abedin apparently can’t be involved with Islam without also being involved with supporters of jihad against the West (source).
Readers: Reading the Facebook posting above from a friend of a friend, do you think that her argument has merit? Or is it just the “two strikes you’re out rule” being applied?
I don’t think so. According to Wikipedia, family income in 2012 was almost 500,000. I doubt that Huma is paid so much money.
It doesn’t seem that his company is out of business yet.
O/T
Huma and Hillary have bad husbands in common. But I think Huma is still the better, since she did (finally) leave her husban! Unlike Hillary, who wouldn’t leave Bill for…at least 250 million dollars. (Their net worth)
Dan: According to http://www.weeklystandard.com/huma-complained-she-wasnt-paid-enough/article/1023502 she was getting money from four sources simultaneously in 2012 and her combined compensation from two of the four sources was roughly $500,000 (source: Hillary Clinton emails, which lack details on what Ms. Abedin was paid from, e.g., the Clinton Foundation).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_Weiner does not seem to have ever had a job other than in politics. He is also 51 years old, a fine age for a child support and alimony plaintiff but not a great age for convincing an employer that you’re going to learn a bunch of new skills.
Let’s just avert our eyes and let these misfits wander off.
the other Donald,
Who? Hillary or Huma?
As one of my FB contacts said… Weiner: the Fredo of the Clinton clan.