Wednesday, May 11, 2016


This is funny, coming from Mitt Romney:
It is disqualifying for a modern-day presidential nominee to refuse to release tax returns to the voters, especially one who has not been subject to public scrutiny in either military or public service. Tax returns provide the public with its sole confirmation of the veracity of a candidate's representations regarding charities, priorities, wealth, tax conformance, and conflicts of interest. Further, while not a likely circumstance, the potential for hidden inappropriate associations with foreign entities, criminal organizations, or other unsavory groups is simply too great a risk to ignore for someone who is seeking to become commander-in-chief.
The amusement, of course, lies in the fact that Mitt refused to release his own tax returns until the public clamor became insurmountable -- and even then, he did not "get naked" to the degree we would have preferred.

Still, I must admit: Mitt makes a damned good point in his next paragraph...
Mr. Trump says he is being audited. So? There is nothing that prevents releasing tax returns that are being audited. Further, he could release returns for the years immediately prior to the years under audit. There is only one logical explanation for Mr. Trump's refusal to release his returns: there is a bombshell in them. Given Mr. Trump's equanimity with other flaws in his history, we can only assume it's a bombshell of unusual size.
The logic here is unassailable. No, I'm not warming up to Mitt Romney: God forbid. I'm simply saying that a valid argument is a valid argument, no matter who makes it.

From Politico:
In February 2015, Trump told radio host Hugh Hewitt that he would “certainly” release at least some of his returns if he ran for the White House, and that he had “no objection” to doing so.

“I would release tax returns,” Trump said, “and I would also explain to people that as a person that’s looking to make money, I’m in the business of making money ... and if I won, I’d make money for our country.”
That's not double-talk. That's quadruple talk.

My suspicion: Trump's tax returns probably do not display actual illegality -- but may give weight to those who argue that The Donald is worth a lot less than he claims. Trump's sole qualification for the presidency is his claimed success as a businessman. That qualification vanishes if the public learns that Trump has squandered an inheritance that would have made him much more money if it had stayed lodged in a hedge fund.

Personally, I never believed that a man worth $10 billion would perform in reality television shows or staged wrestling events. Real billionaires don't need kayfabe.

Need I add the obvious?
If being secretive about taxes is "disqualifying" for Trump, then it is also disqualifying for Bernie Sanders. In our previous post, I argue that Sanders must be hiding something -- something which has made him vulnerable to manipulation. It would not be the first time that a tax problem has forced a progressive to dance to a Republican ratfucker's tune.
So what bombshell was Romney hiding when he didn't want to release his tax records?
It wasn't really a bombshell. He was embarrassed by the fact that he used various (legal) tricks to keep his tax rate extremely low, even though he was and is a millionaire.
"Personally, I never believed that a man worth $10 billion would perform in reality television shows or staged wrestling events. Real billionaires don't need kayfabe."

To this I would add that real billionaires do not run for president. They pay others to do it.
Why won't Hillary release the transcripts of her Wall Street speeches? What kind of bombshell must they contain?
This may be the best place to ask this question: who was the notable political operative who outlined the tactic of spreading a false scandal story about his own candidate, so that it could later be proven false to the benefit of the accused? This blog is the most likely place to have read about this modern Machiavelli. The Dan Rather incident with the forged documents about Dubya's Air National Guard attendance comes to mind.
iirc, wasn't Romney's problem also that he gave almost nothing to charity?

"What is Sanders hiding?" needs to become a clamor.


I believe Lee Atwater developed the technique in the modern political sense and Karl Rove honed and perfected its use.
iirc, wasn't Romney's problem also that he gave almost nothing to charity?

Quite the opposite. Romney's returns showed he gave nearly 30% of his income to charity.
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is 

powered by Blogger. 

Isn't yours?