I guess what it comes down to is that Kevin Drum simply doesn’t believe Harry Reid is telling the truth when he says that an extremely credible source called him on the phone and told him that the reason Mitt Romney will not release his taxes is because he didn’t pay any taxes for ten years. Mr. Drum makes that clear by begging the question with his choices of sophistry, revenge, disingenuousness, or lying as a virtue as the only potential rationales for the Majority Leader’s allegation. Mr. Drum is entitled to his opinion, but he isn’t entitled to thrust his opinion on the rest of us in an effort to make us own it.
Does anyone really believe this? Really? Then, as if that weren’t enough, Reid made his little bluff even less plausible by deciding that Romney didn’t just avoid all taxes for one year, he avoided them for ten years. Yeah, baby, that’s the ticket! Put these two things together with the fact that Reid hasn’t even tried to make his fairy tale sound believable (it’s just some guy he talked to) and this is not a story that a five-year-old would credit. It’s just Reid making stuff up in order to put pressure on Romney, and I think we all know it.
I’ll tell Mr. Drum what I think. I think someone called Harry Reid up and told him that story. That doesn’t mean that whoever told Reid the story knows for certain that Romney didn’t pay his taxes. It doesn’t meet the standard a reporter would need to report that Romney may have not paid his taxes. But it was convincing enough to Reid that he was willing to bet that Romney wouldn’t be able to refute the charge. I mean, at this point I guess we can start talking about moral choices. If Reid is convinced that Romney found enough write-offs and tax shelters that he was able to zero out his taxes, he can keep that opinion to himself or he can share it with the world. On the down side, maybe Reid’s source is wrong or full of shit. In that case, Romney might choose to release his taxes just to prove Reid wrong. That could be embarrassing. On the up side, if Romney releases his taxes, the American people will get the information they deserve to have while vetting Romney as a potential president. Chances are, they won’t like what they see in those tax returns even if he did pay some taxes. So, it’s a political winner for Reid. It’s a winner for the American people. I don’t see why this is a problem morally or politically. I really don’t.
But Drum just thinks the story is made of whole cloth. He’s telling us that it is a transparent lie that has no credibility. Isn’t he engaging in an even worse libel than the one he’s imputing to Reid? Mr. Drum, after all, doesn’t even say that he has a credible source alleging that Reid is lying. He’s just attacking Reid with nothing but his opinion to back him up.
Now, I’ve been bullshitted around by Harry Reid’s office a couple of times (on the procedure for telecommunications immunity, for example), but they’ve never outright lied to me. At worst, they treated me like they thought I was stupid. I think of Harry Reid as a man who will say some pretty blunt things, but I don’t think of him as a liar. I’m not saying he hasn’t or he wouldn’t lie. I am not even saying that he isn’t lying in this case. I’m only saying that I have little reason to assume he is lying.
Maybe the charge itself seems so outlandish that it’s hard to credit. But Mitt Romney has a lot of ways to avoid paying taxes. Start out with the fact that most of his money comes from capital gains and dividends which are both taxed at a lower rate than income. Then factor in a 10% tithe deduction. Perhaps there is a giant mortgage deduction in there, too. Push some money into a tax-deferred IRA that somehow accumulated seven to eight figures. Then push more income into tax shelters in the Cayman Islands and take other money and put it in secret Swiss bank accounts. He also has a ton of money that is deferred in future payments from Bain or stock options at various corporations. With a phalanx of accountants, it is not impossible that Romney could get his actual income down to a point that he could deduct away any money due.
Remember, he didn’t take any money for serving as governor and if he took any money for working on the Olympics, it was deferred.
The story isn’t as outlandish as it might sound. And Harry Reid isn’t a guy with a credibility problem so big that he can just be dismissed. I think Mr. Drum needs to cool his jets on this one. He’s jumping the gun. He could be right, but the only way we’ll know is if Romney releases his tax returns.
I’m not sure how a rich man not paying taxes for 10 years is any more incredible than someone accumulating 100 million in an IRA. We already know Rmoney did the latter; is the former so far fetched?
Yeah, I mean the story might be flawed in some respects. Perhaps, for example, Reid’s source meant Romney only avoided paying any income tax, not any taxes of any kind.
Well, in 2000 we know that he may have made as little as $100,000 from Bain in actual salary. And he received no salary from them after 2003. He didn’t take a salary for the Olympics and he didn’t take a salary as governor.
If he had basically no salary income, then one big mortgage payment might and a bunch of charitable donations would wipe out any income taxes. The man hasn’t had a salaried job since he left Bain.
Yep. Here’s what one of Josh Marshall’s sources says:
“I think you’re missing a key nuance from Romney’s denials and indignation here. Note that the response always appears to be “I paid a lot of taxes” and not “I paid a lot of income taxes.”
…[snip]…
From my initial understanding (and I am no tax professional, but have 10 years experience in private equity and am familiar with how the senior professionals manage their finances), there’s a possibility that Romney paid very little (i.e. less than 10%) income taxes during the 2002 to 2009 period in many of those years. It is quite possible that some of those years could have approached zero. There’s a lot of different ways to make that happen, through standard structuring/gifting, offshore planning, charitable contributions, and favorable recent tax laws for carried interest and capital gains. “
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2012/08/missing_the_key_issue.php?ref=fpblg
And what do you know? It turns out Drum read the same piece and (to his credit) has a new post about it. He’s still not backing down on his criticisms of Reid, but he does acknowledge now have a “sliver of doubt”.
http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2012/08/mitt-romney-and-his-mysterious-102-million-ira
I think it would be a good idea for you to bookmark all of these righteous indignation articles and copy the content before they disappear down the memory hole – I can’t see Harry Reid putting himself out there without verifiable evidence. I expect Harry Reid to reveal his source (if it’s not McCain) and/or the evidence collected from the source the Friday before the GOP Convention on the morning talking-head shows. If it’s from the McCain ’08 Campaign then McCain will be on the Fox show that Sunday condemning the person responsible for leaking the information. Either way Reid will go on one of the other shows and the GOP Convention will be awash in what-do-we-do-now since Romney will be badly, if not terminally, injured.
I think Reid has the actual returns in his hands…
Wondering if he’d reveal the source around the convention –
Reid wouldn’t get within ten feet of those returns if they were offered. Also doubt that he would have touched this story if his source had come by his/her knowledge illegally.
I could buy Reid not asking about the source of the info, especially if it was from someone who might have a plausible way to know. Deniability would probably be more important that strict letter – ESPECIALLY if there’s something in those returns that gives him reason to know Mitt would rather quit than release.
The McCain campaign had the actual returns – they may not have the physical returns now but the source could vouch for the content if pressed, and may even have copies. Not sure about how nondisclosure works, but I think Reid’s story is completely credible.
Entirely possible that those returns could have been seen by plenty of low level staffers at Bain, one of the law or accounting offices used by Mitt, or McCain’s operation that was overlooked when those non-disclosure agreements were secured. Or Kinkos when they were copied.
Really amazing how many so-called liberals are freaking out about Reid. Finally, Dems show they have the fight in them, and folks supposedly on our side want them to do the whole “above the fray” thing, which worked so well for Kerry.
They always want to be “fair”. That’s why they always lose.
Damn right. I don’t want fair. I want a junkyard dog that will tear my enemies to shreds.
I have seen this too. And every time I see a liberal wringing his hands over Reid’s accusations, i want to punch that liberal in the head.
Just shut. the. fuck. up. and let Mitt twist in the wind.
It’s not even that. Reid said he got a phone call from someone who claimed…. That’s all. Sure it’s a big accusation, but all Reid has said is that someone made it. Even if he’s wrong, no one will ever prove he lied.
I confess I NEVER expected that Reid would begin to channel LBJ. Not unhappy about it, though.
But I’m not terribly surprised that the non-Faux punditry is running for cover; the wingnut wurlitzer can be deafening.
Professionally speaking, of course, “no taxes” on several mil in income could be doable if there was enough lead time for planning and the willingness on the principal’s part to go deep into the grey areas.
On the other paw it’s not THAT risky. The IRS under BushCo was under orders (published) not to pick on the big guys, and at Mittens’s level, it’s EXPECTED that one plays in grey and then, if audited, negotiates with the Service to find a midrange level that won’t require IRS to go to court.
The risk for Mitt (since nobody’s actually accusing him of a crime) is that the rules for the Romneys are not the same as the rules for the Rodriguezes, and the general public may well be moved to pitchfork and torch level if they ever get a close look at just HOW different (and how flexible) the rich guy’s rules are.
My money would be on Romney not paying an income taxes. He probably would have paid capital gains and dividend taxes.
The reason I say that is because he has no had a salaried job (where he accepted the salary) since 1999. So, how much income could he have? He made speeches. I think he made a couple hundred grand from them one year and referred to it as “not much.” But if you are only talking an income in the low six-figures, and you have massive mortgage and charitable deductions, then you can see how you might wind up not paying jack in income taxes.
Consider his total compensation from all sources and what a 10% tithe of that would be, and then compare it a couple of hundred thousand dollars in actual income. His tithe could be bigger than his total income.
And there would be nothing wrong with that. But he wouldn’t be paying much of anything in income taxes in that situation, would he?
Then you have him doing things like making Ann’s horse a corporation and writing off $70,000 in expenses. And all the off-shore crap. I don’t think the guy has been paying very much in taxes, frankly.
My money would be on Romney not paying an income taxes. He probably would have paid capital gains and dividend taxes.
Gosh, then he would be just like those deadbeat poor people that wingers are always screaming about who “don’t pay ANY INCOME TAX”.
Never yet heard one distinguish between not paying income tax and “Not Paying ANY taxes!!!!!” except when they’re talking about people with more money than God’s investment counsellor.
For the life of me I don’t understand why this charge is considered “outlandish.” Unverified? Yes. Politically motivated? Absolutely. But “outlandish,” as in so defying the realm of possibility that it can’t be imagined?
Is it outlandish because the rich always pay lots of taxes, and never try to avoid them? Well, no. Is it outlandish because Mitt Romney would never do something so crass? This is a man who lies as easily as he breathes. Is it outlandish because Mitt has been running for president since 2007 and should long ago have put such hijinx behind him, knowing that the optics are terrible? This is a guy whose whole campaign is serial blunders based on his complete inability to understand that the “little people” (in the Leona Helmsley sense) resent the rich when they operate by totally different rules.
In every conceivable way, the charge seems plausible. Not proven, but plausible. Is The Village really that clueless and chickenshit?
Wait. Don’t answer that last one.
fuck this whining about the ‘ veracity’ of Harry Reid.
Willard lies every fucking time he opens his mouth.
Has never told the truth about the President.
Maybe someone ought to tell Drum to get his ass to a computer and watch Rachel Maddow’s shows from last week, where she detailed, quite well, that the entire tax thing is a repeat of what he did in 2002, complete with the ‘ oh, I’ll get back to you about those tax returns’. only then, it was the Boston Globe, and this time, it was ABC.
Guess what – Willard fucking lied.
Guess what else came up in 2002 – RETROACTIVITY.
Yes.
so, Drum should get his ass to a computer, watch Maddow’s segments and then take a strong dose of
S-T-F-U
Tired of these whiny ass titty babies.
I love that the Prudential Building is paying these wusses no mind.
GO HARRY REID!!!
Drum has a serial problem with Rachel’s style. Too much snark for his tastes. Or possibly he wanted Benen’s gig but never got the call.
Kevin should wear pearls then he’d have something tangible to clutch every time he gets the vapors and reaches for a keyboard to write a smack down of some Democrat/liberal/leftie.
What makes Reid’s claim so delicious is that, unlike the virtually unanswerable “my opponent beats his wife/is a pederast/etc.” charge, this one IS answerable. Easily. By the person against whom the charge is being made. The thing is, the charge has to be false. And therein lies its deliciousness.
And I agree the claim is entirely believable.
Yup. It comes to this: Mittens can make one thirty-second phone call and this problem, Harry Reid, AND Nancy Pelosi all go away within about an hour and his (at the moment negligible) credibility skyrockets.
But… no phone call.
I’m beginning to think we’re seriously underestimating the gravity of what’s in those returns. I was thinking grey areas and rule stretches. I’m starting to lean towards federal felonies….
I wonder if all the money he poured into his previous campaigns is tax deductible? No money in this time. But last time it was all his money. Any tax experts out there???
I remember Kevin when he first started posting as Calpundit – I think you can still find his old blog on-line somewhere. Then the promo to Washington Monthly and then Mother Jones.
I have to tell you, no one who read him at Calpundit could have imagined he’d end up at Mother Jones. He was the very slightly left-of-center centrist who always tried to split the baby and find equal fault with both sides. He was the perfect cocktail party Democratic pundit – picking on his own side almost as often as the other and thinking the middle was superior to either side. A post like this latest one would have been fully expected at that time.
He was one of the last converts to the “Iraq War is a bad idea” viewpoint, along with Josh Marshall, if I recall correctly. He was very late to the “Order of the Shrill”.
But somewhere along the way he began seeing the right for what it was, and it began showing in his posts. A few at first, and then eventually he became so firmly on the left that Mother Jones seemed a good place for him.
So – I dunno – maybe he’s just writing this out of old habit or something.
So here’s US News & World Report laying out the clues and how they point to a yes Romney could have paid close to zero taxes. All legal and legality may be an even bigger sword against the GOP than just complicated rich man returns.
Yet they throw the “McCarthyist” slam at Reid. McCarthy accused people of being Communists. How do you prove that you are not a Communist? Or not anything? Only be exhaustive elimination. Reid’s accusation is more like accusing someone of not paying their rent. All one has to do is produce a rent receipt or mortgage payment record. The two types of accusation are not only not the same, they are exact opposites.
One of Drum’s cats recently died tragically so maybe that is affecting him. This is straight up garbage, especially when Romney is out here saying Obama doesn’t want the troops to vote and trying to give everyone welfare checks for no work. Come on
The key to this is that Reid is a Mormon. I believe he got the info from someone in the Mormon circles that the both inhabit.
That would be a very small circle if “Bain investor,” having access to the information in Mitt’s tax returns, and enmity towards Mitt is included.
I don’t think there is anything in the returns that shows any illegality at play, merely very low taxes paid. And he did have income, mostly from speaking gigs over the years. Remember he said he didn’t make much, only about $350,000 last year (one of those comments meant to show he is one of us).
However, if there was one year (and 2009 might be that year)where there was anything even slightly fishy, he coudln’t get away with releasing everything but that year’s return. This is why I think the 2009 returns are the key. If that year’s return was nice and clean, he could have released it and said, “Okay, here’s another year” and be done with it.
The other factor is that Romney is just plain arrogant and doesn’t believe the peasants have the right to know his personal business.
Keep in mind that team McCain didn’t see the 2008 return either.
And maybe Romney’s accountants and lawyers are really good at tax avoidance.
And why not?
Next time someone tells you loopholes benefit mostly the poor and the middle class tell them about tax avoidance and how often the big executive pays less than his secretary.
Do secretaries write the tax loopholes into law?
I think not.