So now we know why Mutt won't release his earlier tax returns. He has repeatedly stated that he left management of Bain in 1998 (so he would not get blamed for all of the loss of jobs of his "investments"). He even certified on federal disclosure forms that he had done so. Now according to the SEC, he was still the CEO, COB and sole stockholder of Bain up through 2002. So he either lied to the public and on federal financial disclosure forms about when he left, or he lied to the SEC. Either of which have serious criminal repercussions.
"Remember to always be yourself. Unless you can be batman. Then always be batman." Unknown
We'll see what, if anything, comes of this. As of now, the Washington Post fact checker isn't buying it.
Millions of dollars of attack ads by the Obama campaign are hanging in the balance. If Romney left Bain in February 1999, when he departed to run the Olympics, then a number of business deals that went sour (such as KB Toys) can’t be counted as part of Romney’s tenure. If he actually left in 2002, as the Obama campaign alleges, then those deals are fair game.
We have looked at this issue before, back in January, and thought we had settled it.
But now the Boston Globe has raised the issue again. The story seems to hinge on a quote from a former Securities and Exchange Commission member, which would have more credibility if the Globe had disclosed she was a regular contributor to Democrats. (Interestingly, “The Real Romney,” a book on the former Massachusetts governor, by Boston Globe reporters, states clearly that he left Bain when he went to run the Olympics and details the turmoil that ensued when he suddenly quit, nearly breaking up the partnership)
We’re considering whether to once again take a deeper look at this, though it really feels like Groundhog Day again. There appears to be some confusion about how partnerships are structured and managed, or what SEC documents mean. (Just because you are listed as an owner of shares does not mean you have a managerial role.)
Why should we accept your statements as facts when you haven't even provided a link to support it yet?
If true, I sure wouldn't vote for the guy. But nothing is yet clear from what I've seen so far. And I haven't yet decided if I'd vote for him anyway, there is always the libertarian or greenie. But it's amazing you can state such "facts" at this point. Didn't you read the Washington Post article from today which I posted earlier? The factcheck.org article is informative too, but it was written a bit before this new info came out (not that it's yet clear this new info amounts to much)
I agree Romney should release more tax records. But he does have some history to back him up. So far as I can see, you have to go back to FDR to find a president that released more than 8 years of tax records before he was elected.
Obama did release 8 years in 2008 going back to 2000 (and you'd be asking for even more than that from Romney, I'm guessing). Among all the other presidents, it looks like they only released tax records during the years they served (minus a year or two). I know the talking point about Mitt's dad releasing 12 years of so of tax records, but he never even got nominated. But again, I agree the more tax records released, the better, not that there is a requirement.
Editing to add, it's really interesting to read any of FDR's tax records going back to 1914 from the above link. Things sure have changed since then! Lots of handwriting in the 1914 return too. Wonder if it's from FDR?
Much ado about nothing. He had taken a hasty leave of absense to save the Salt Lake Olympic Games from a bribery scandal, working 70 hour weeks. Pretty hard to be working full time at Bain too.
The Boston Globe had stories noting this in the years being dicscussed.
Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.
Washington Post Fact Checker - Three Pinocchio's...
Do Bain SEC documents suggest Mitt Romney is a criminal?
As we wrote yesterday, we are standing with our assessment that Mitt Romney left the helm of Bain Capital in 1999, when he left to run the Salt Lake City Olympics. The date is important because some questionable investments by Bain took place between 1999 and 2002, when he ran for governor. But a Boston Globe article on Thursday raised new questions about that timeline, citing SEC filings, and the Obama campaign jumped to take advantage of it.
Despite the furor, we did not see much new in the Globe article. We had examined many SEC documents related to Romney and Bain in January, and concluded that much of the language saying Romney was “sole stockholder, chairman of the board, chief executive officer, and president” was boilerplate that did not reveal whether he was actually managing Bain at the time. (For instance, there is no standard definition of a “chief executive,” securities law experts say, and there is no requirement for anyone to have any responsibilities even if they have that title.)
The one thing new we saw in the Globe story was the assertion that “Romney’s state financial disclosure forms indicate he earned at least $100,000 as a Bain ‘executive’ in 2001 and 2002, separate from investment earnings.” But then we realized we had already reviewed those documents in January. The 2001 form describes him as a “former executive” (see page 1 of form A-5) — the campaign says this was retirement pay — but the 2002 form says “executive.” So either you believe he suddenly rejoined the firm, after leaving it, or someone made a typo.
Romney’s sudden departure from Bain had left the partnership in flux, in fact almost breaking up the firm, and a final resolution was not reached until he ended his Olympic sojourn and decided to run for governor. At that point, he signed retirement papers that set his departure date as February 1999, the month he left for the Olympics.
[snip]
We were tempted to award this claim Four Pinocchios, but the documents with his signature leave some room for inquiry.
