For months, Mitt Romney was effectively Bartleby the Scrivener when it came to tax returns. Governor, why won't you disclose the materials to the public? "I prefer not to."
This morning, Romney went to the friendly confines of "Fox & Friends" to try out a new line. Igor Volsky posted the clip.
"The Obama people keep on wanting more and more and more," the GOP candidate said. "More things to pick through, more things for their opposition research to try make a mountain out of and to distort and to be dishonest about."
I'm delighted Romney is now saying something in response to the question, but I'm having a tough time wrapping my head around this one. He's going to keep his tax returns secret and hidden from public view because ... Obama might find stuff?
Isn't this effectively the same thing as saying, "I can't release my tax returns; I'm running for office for Pete's sake"?
Complicating matters, Romney also said on Fox that he shouldn't be compared to other presidential candidates, but rather, compared to other candidates' spouses. "John Kerry ran for president," Romney said. "You know, his wife, who has hundreds of millions of dollars, she never released her tax returns. Somehow, this wasn't an issue."
Um, governor? Teresa Heinz Kerry wasn't a candidate for the nation's highest office; you are. And in 2004, John Kerry made 20 years' worth of returns available.
Leave a Comment:
and again, no evidence offered by Mr. Romney to support his claims of distortion and dishonesty. Please, Mr. Romney, do provide this evidence, or again, you simply indulge in false witnessing.
There is truth to Romney's assertion. Senator Kerry released his returns as part of his run for Senate. And as reported by the Huffington Post in April, he released an additional 2 years for his run at the Presidency.
It is inaccurate to say, "And in 2004, John Kerry made 20 years' worth of returns available." No, he made an additional 2 years' worth of returns available. The game of politics is that you can be technically correct but factually misleading.
I disagree, RobDon. Since in 2004, Kerry made available two more years of tax returns - in addition to the previous 18 years, which were still available - it is technically and truthfully correct to state, "And in 2004, John Kerry made 20 years' worth of returns available."
June, I do understand your position. If the impression is made that Kerry released 20 years of tax return in his run for President when in reality he had already released 18 years in his runs for Senator, then what is communicated would not be "technically" correct but would be a very "nit-picky" difference.
Okay, RobDon, I can agree that the "nit-picky difference" does lie in the use of "made available," vs. "released."
No, RobDon, the IMPORTANT point is that there were 20 years worth of tax return information available for public inspection. Romney apparently didn't release tax returns in his run for Massachusetts governor, or we would have data to crunch. He still has released exactly 1 (one) year of tax information for public consumption.
If he's going to meet the Kerry standard, he has 19 years of returns still to release.
If this is the standard, then President Obama needs to release his college transcript. Kerry eventually...reluctantly...did because it showed that his grades at Yale were as mediocre as Bush's.
See, if this is the game being played, it can go on and on.
What a gop cop out , 1st , that is not a standard set , 2nd , where is romneys transcrpts then ? if your going to use thatexcuse ? Where are bushs? obama has released his taxes , and now you are demanding he release his grades , as if he did not graduate , you peoples standards are a worthless joke
Patango, you are missing the point. The point is where does it end?
Additional, George W. did release his transcript if you read the article I used. As to "you peoples standards are a worthless joke," it was Kerry at the time refusing to release his transcript because despite how he was being portrayed as the "intellectual" his grades turned out to be as mediocre as Bush's.
To my point, what if Romney released 3 years of returns, would that be sufficient? 5 years? 20? Then what would be next? Who determines?
In the end, President Obama wins on this issue because any time not spent on his policies and the current economic situation is a plus for him. IMHO
Can't believe we are arguing technicalities. The fact is Kerry released 18, years then 2 more, Obama released 12 years and Rmoney can't give us 2 years without wriggling in his chair.
http://www.taxhistory.org/www/website.nsf/Web/PresidentialTaxReturns?OpenDocument
There's a risk that if Obama wants more of Romney's tax returns, then the Repubs would counter by demanding his original birth certificate for forensic analysis, high school and college transcripts. This strategy might backfire horribly for the president.
Cindy - you left out Obama's membership to the Communist Party, Muslim's United for the Downfall of America, and Black People are Better...it's all going to backfire because of those pesky tax returns.
Thanks for being our daily demonstration in what kind of ignorance it takes to flunk the IQ test low enough to be one of you Stepford Wife wingnut scum.
His birth certificate has already been released.
Why should college and high school transcripts be important here? I'd be more worried about DUI and/or being involved in fatal accidents than if the person got a C in high school algebra or in modern English.
I would like to see Romney's college transcripts to see how he did in barbering class.Since he enjoyed cutting hair while in high school so much.
The quality of troll is just getting worse and worse. C'mon trolls! Up your game, dudes!!
Hahahahahahahaha...
Yeah, Romney believes in this country so much, he even out sourced his savings.
Romney - you want us to believe in you, but you don't even believe in America, you out sourced jobs and money instead of investing in this country.
I hope you choke on your "buzz lightyear" underwear.
Really? This?
Sigh*** I remember the days when Steve's commenters recognized sarcasm.
I was going to say, sounds like snark to me!
And Nancy Reagan was pregnant when she married Ronnie.
Plus, there's that T. Jefferson & his slave thing.
While I have been happily married to my adoring wife for- how long is it? Chuckle chuckle.
Gosh darn it, but that Chicago gangsta is gettin' uppity!
Since when is asking for more than one year's tax returns from a Presidential candidate considered by anybody to be an excessive, unreasonable request?
And hasn't Mitt heard that a growing number of Republicans are now calling for him to release more, if for no other reason than to put this issue to rest? Are they being unreasonable too?
So Mitt continues to whine and play the victim. Not at all becoming for a Presidential candidate. But perfectly normal for a spoiled little rich boy.
He needs more time to "doctor" them up.
Where's "the donald" and his in depth investigation for these "missing" tax returns?
Where's Sheriff Joe and his crack(nut) team of investigators?
I wonder if McCain would release the sets that he was given?
We asked for the Car Fax, but Romney gave us the Car FoxNews instead.
Romney knows this would happen because he knows that the 23 years of tax returns he showed McCain were why McCain chose Sarah Palin over him as less of a problem.
Watching this smirking scum starting to twist slowly in the wind is FUN.
There is a reason Willard didn't get the Nomination the first time
Weak weak candidate
There is a reason he won the second time
Everyone was weaker than him in that clown car show.
There is a reason McCain didn't pick him has VP
It was those Tax returns
Notice how old blabberlips McCain who will spout off on the talking head shows the minute a mike is shoved in his face , has been no comment on Willard's taxes
For that matter anyone who saw them has been silent .
I wonder how much that cost the Romney Campaign?
Fox News headline, if Obama wouldn't release his returns because Ann Romney wouldn't:
"Obama compares himself to a girl"
C L U E L E S S !!
I'm sure it's because he paid zero in taxes for most of those years.
And that "The Obama people keep on wanting more and more and more," the GOP candidate said. "More things to pick through, more things for their opposition research to try make a mountain out of and to distort and to be dishonest about" is both hilarious (are William Kristol and George Will "Obama people"?) and so one-sided.
Compare his fellow GOPer, Darrell Issa, screaming for thousands and thousands of documents to comb through to see if he could dig up a single bit of dirt on the Solyndra loan; think about the right wing combing thousands of Justice Kagan's emails to see if they could come up with something, anything to demand she 'recuse herself' from the ACA decision.
I do believe it's the absolute one-sidedness, the obvious unfairness of this man that will sink him.
That and his utter disdain for those not rich. and white.
Is it that he didn't pay taxes? Or that he didn't tithe his 10%? 10% of a bazillion dollars (or whatever Mitt's income is) has got to be a huge windfall for a church -- if the church actually receives it.
What's that saying of Romney's?What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander?The whiner think's it should work one way.His way!
When the question in the video is asked, Romney doesn't even give a moment's though to actually doing what so many are suggesting. He only focuses on reasons why he shouldn't release more tax returns. The Teresa Heinz-Kerry argument is laughable; she wasn't running for President. The John McCain argument is also laughable; he'd been a Senator for a thousand years; his income as a Senator is public record.
Let's face it - there is something in those past returns that Romney will do ANYTHING to keep from getting out. If John McCain were as ruthless as Romney, he could probably pad his own wallet pretty well, knowing what he knows about those returns.
I predict that the first round of "released" tax returns will be heavily "redacted"
I predict that it will be from 2009, a year that was also tailored with the Presidential election in mind. Thus, making it meaningless.
Then Romney argument, one that he's already making, will be that it will never be enough.
I also think that the conservative beltway press will be receptive to that argument and will defend Romney at that point. Outside the beltway, I don't think it will fly
I predict it will all be technically legal with maybe some filing or other corrections.
rollo, but, he has that problem with the whole Mass election commission trying to verify his residency. You know, lying in court and what not. What's that called?
I wasn't working in Mass because I was in Utah. But, then again I was in Mass because I wanted to be governor in Mass, so, shut up.
Rmoney needed to be a resident of Mass for 7 years for him to run as governor. So what's the prob? He either lied to the SEC (ownership of Bain) or he lied to Mass SEC regarding residency.
Which is it?
gordona: What were the years of legal residency for each state? Could he have had dual residency for requirement purposes? What is your source of information? Thanks---
When Romney finally chooses his VP nominee, I'd like the press to ask a simple question. It will tell us all we need to know about Romney and this tax return issue:
The question is this:
"When Gov. Romney's team was vetting you, how many years a tax returns did you produce to the vetting team?"
This is a question that will never get asked of Romney's VP pick, but it certainly should. And if we had a responsible MSM, it certainly would.
He sure is whiny.
Of course he is. This is probably the most scrutiny he's ever received in his life. When you spent your childhood riding the butler like a pony, spurs and all, you develop unreasonable expectations about what you can get away with.
Ordinarily I don't like the "where there's smoke, there's fire" type of argument, but at this point Romney's refusal to make his tax returns public can't be explained in any other way. Romney's returns from recent years, anytime before 2010, must have some information in them that is more negative than the heat he is taking over not releasing them. And given the drubbing he is getting right now, one can only imagine just how damning those returns must be.
This is dragging his campaign down, like the mother of all undertows. I almost feel sorry for him. Almost - I watch a couple of clips of him and I get over the feeling real quick.
What I don't get is the temerity of assuming he could run without releasing them .
The arrogance is beyond the pale.
I don't think he's this smart, but it's worth recalling what Hillary did.
She sat on her and Bill's returns for month after month while the Obamabots such as myself worked ourselves up into a frenzy of speculation, believing that there must be some terrible secret in them and then, when it had hit a frenzied fever pitch, she released them and they showed . . . nothing much beyond the fact that she and Bill had made a lot of money, didn't do much by way of tricky tax avoidance and gave a decent amount to charity.
She made a lot of people on the other side of the fight look stupid and took the issue off the table. All in all, one of the better pieces of campaign work and there's no way it wasn't deliberate.
Again, I think there's only about a 2% chance Romney's doing that, but it can't be discounted.
Steve, when I read today about George Will's, Pete Session's, etc. clamoring about releasing the tax info, your idea came to my mind also. If this has been Romney's plan from the get-go, I must give him an A+ in political strategy. I do believe he thought well in advance before he decided to embark on his past political aspirations (i.e., "I'm running for office for Pete's sake, I can't have illegals")...can he scrub these tax records & Bain difficulties clean though? Hmmmm....
OMG. Teresa Heinz Kerry's tax returns weren't an issue? What office was she running for? He's got to be joking? No one can see his returns because they might dig something up? He won't tell anyone what he's going to do if he gets elected because no one will vote for him if he does. Willard, shut up and go play in your car elevator....Please! Let the adults take over.
If this was a movie, critics would be complaining how unbelievable this nonsense is. It's a shame his father passed away.
I get the feeling that ol' Mitty is a little confused about all this uproar and him not being able to ram shhit down people's throat the way it works for him in the heroic private sector he's such a winner in. Maybe that little sense of entitlement Mr. Mitt has had since childhood is causing some cognitive dissonance in his Republican post-truth brain.
So George Will is "Obama people" now??
George Will is an extremely intelligent man. I seldom agree with him - I am a dyed-in-the-wool democrat and a retired union carpenter - but he is possibly the only conservative pundit that actually makes me stop and think seriously about what he says. I've been reading and listening to him for over 30 years.
As best as I can tell nobody has asked about Mitt's investments in Bain projects after 1999 - any investments he doesn't want to talk about?
I'm interested to see if there's anything in there about Romney's financially benefiting from the Alan Stanford/Solamere Capital ponzi scheme that the Ron Paul folks seem especially worked up about.
Just a suggestion for an Obama version of the new vintage Romney button:
http://www5.snapfish.com/snapfish/getimageforshare/p=678161342465975399/l=4472950026/s=6647118026/t=ALB/g=10888324026/campaignName=ShareeNewReg_30FreePrints_2010Feb/otsc=SYE/otsi=SANR
The button would include a caption bubble for George Romney saying, " Son you have to release about 12 years of tax returns if you want the American people to trust you. 'One year could be a fluke perhaps done for show.'
Mitt's dad set the bar high in an interview with LOOK magazine's senior editor, T. George Harris: "Releasing a single return wouldn't prove anything It could be a fluke, or even a cynical manipulation designed to make the candidate look good. What really mattered was how a candidate managed his personal finances over the long haul."
Let’s stop for a moment and pretend everything Mitt and his campaign are currently saying is true. We'll call this "the best case scenario." Mitt left in 1999, had absolutely nothing to do with Bain from 1999 to 2002 (except to draw a 100k/year salary which I have neither heard them explain nor refute) and concentrated 100% of his energy on rescuing the Olympics, which we have to admit, ended up a success. In 2002 then, after the Olympics were over, Mitt retroactively retired back to 1999 and a new CEO was named, meaning that there was no CEO for three years.
This is their best-case scenario, correct? So their BEST CASE is that the founder and CEO left suddenly in 1999, without a succession plan in place, and therefore the company was left without a CEO for three years? What kind of businessman, manager, or leader does that? Certainly not the type I want running my country, especially when his key selling point is his business savvy. It appears that, even in his best-case scenario, he demonstated rash thinking, poor judgment and an inability to effectively plan for the future.
Of course, the best case scenario is bullcrap, so it's even worse than that.
Does former half term governor Sarah Palin count?
Did he retroactively unsign the Romeycare for the state of Massachusetts?
Actually on the face of it grumpy, $100k/yr sounds mour like a retainer fee or "investment" return rather than a yearly salary for a firm like that. I would imagine an "active" President or CEO of a firm like Bain capital would get a salary in the Millions. That salary ($100,000) seems like a salar of a mid-level accountant at a firm like that. So, again at first blush (only) that amount of yearly pay does look like it is a retainer level or such.
Except that's the MINIMUM it could be... they refuse to reveal what it ACTUALLY is.
OK grumpy.....but all I've heard/read so far is the $100k amount. If he got more, you would think the larger amount would be making the rounds. Also, if it does turn out that he was still in charge - and say was paid more even - if there is nothing illegal with the filing thing, then all this "expose" would show is that he was still in charge of a legal enterprise and he made more than he says. I am not sure how much this would hurt him since I think most people have made up there minds. I really don't believe anyone that says they haven't decided yet. Of course the Democrats can probably point out some of Bains investments during that time that may have caused companies to fold and layoff people, but that is what venture capital firms do - sometimes it acquires companies that they can't turn around and layoffs result, but they also do turn companies around that flourish. Naturally during this campaign, you will not hear much about the positive side.
Consulting fee.
It speaks to his trend of hiding, of concealing what his finances have been and what he has or hasn't been responsible for, while touting his "business experience" and ability to make money as reasons he'd be a good president. At the very least, he's very visibly lied and in a way that isn't easily shooed away (otherwise this would have gone the way of his other bouts with falsehood, lost after a day or two into obscurity); at the worst, he's committed a felony, and I don't think even most Republicans are ready for a felon in the White House.
I'm pretty sure Eric Holder has all of Romney's tax info on his desk. Every scrap of it from as far back as records go. The IRS doesn't throw this stuff away, you know.
I'm sure the situation has already passed the 'suspicion' level just on the SEC docs alone (they are all over the internet right now). I'm sure Holder already has enough to launch a deep investigation.
The upshot, now, is when and how to act on it. IF there seems to be enough for "filing criminal charges" - then the handling of this will be politically explosive-- as we are already seeing.
This is so much fun to watch...
And if Romney could prove that, the House wouldn't need to make up charges about Fast and Furious. Holder would be toast (and probably Obama as collateral damage.)
Yup. Legacy of Watergate. Illegal as meth-laced moonshine and ten times as likely to be leaked to the press if its happening.
The nerve of the voting public wanting the same records that every other presidential candidate since WW II have shared with them. It's not the Obama people who want more and more. It's the people you are asking to vote for you. They think you are not being honest by stonewalling on a given.
It was Romney's father who warned against putting trust in a presidential candidate who will only release partial tax returns from selective years. Said such a practice would be equivalent to deliberately hiding a pattern of wrongdoing and voters should never give such a candidate a break.
You know your campaign is in deep trouble when you begin to confuse the voters with your opposition.
Who do they think they are, any way?
They need to learn some respect for their betters.
The nerve of the voting public wanting the same records that every other presidential candidate since WW II have shared with them
Actually I really don't think 97% of the voting public is even aware of any of this going on. Most do not get into this like folks here or the 3% that may watch the news and Sunday talk shows regularly. I mean come on, a new Big Brother season is starting and there is always more American Idol to watch. The last thing the average voter is thinking about this summer is anyone's tax return or some strange paperwork like FEC and SEC filings. :)
When will Mitt "get it" that it isn't so much that Obama is after him, it's the American people who want him to come clean.
He isn't defying Obama.... he's thumbing his nose at all of us.
It was a strategy of Romney and his company to shutdown or break apart companies and move them off shore. I wold like to know how many companies were closed and jobs lost caused by Romney's strategy. Why an American worker could vote for such a person is beyond me.
His actions have shown a total disregard for the average American. The man knows nothing about the day in a life of the average person. If Romney gets elected, the quality of life for 90% in this country will go down.
So true. this is why their out there now saying Pres Obama is not American because it's Mitt thats not American. Pres Obama hates America but it's Mitt that hates America, Pres Obama is a communist, Mitt's the one that sent jobs to communist China. Mitt used America and the people to makes his millions, not the nice way but the vultures way.
Romney is trying to 'depoliticize' the economy and argue that the scope of government be reduced through privatization and liberalization. At the same time he is running on an Economic platform. Of course he will not disclose his taxes. It's the culture of the rich and they are the crux of his campaign. Romney's economic platform, like the Republican Congress, is not about JOBS.
They think we're stupid.