Categorized | Commentary/Editorial

Imploring Mitt Romney to Release His Records; Updated: Romney’s Job Creation Claim Between "Phony" and "Unverifiable"





Last week, Governor Palin urged Mitt Romney to be release his tax records and back up his "job creation" claims.

Via BigGovernment:

“Governor Romney has claimed to have created 100,000 jobs at Bain, and people are wanting to know: is there proof?” Palin told Sean Hannity on Fox News.

Rick Tyler, former Gingrich aide and head of Newt Gingrich’s Super PAC, has already accused Romney of having created those 100,000 jobs in Asia and Mexico. Earlier this week, Big Government pointed out that Romney’s claim to have created 100,000 jobs contrasts with claims he made during his 1994 U.S. Senate campaign, when he claimed to have created 10,000 jobs at Bain. Romney retired from Bain Capital in 1999.

Palin said that Romney needed to come clean about his record, given the likelihood that Democrats would probe the tax issue and Romney’s tenure at Bain if he were to become the Republican nominee.

While being interviewed again last Saturday, Governor Palin restated why she believes Mitt Romney needs to be more transparent about his record:

"Let’s talk about job creation claims by a candidate and get to the bottom of it. And the candidate who is being accused of maybe not creating all of the jobs that they have claimed, well he can capitalize on it and he can explain what his record is."

Governor Palin is absolutely correct. Mitt Romney can use the opportunity of people calling on him to release his records to make his case. By releasing his tax records, the data he used to come up with the number of jobs he "created" at Bain Capital, and even the names of his bundlers, he can "inoculate" himself for what is sure to come.

As the front-runner in this GOP primary cycle, the left is presently storing up ammunition to use against Mitt Romney come general election season. They are fully aware that Romney has yet to release these very important documents. Without them, the left is free to assume any reason they want as to why he hasn’t.

As Eleanor Clift did over the weekend, via Newsbusters:

ELEANOR CLIFT, NEWSWEEK: Romney’s refusal so far to release his income tax returns will be linked to probable investments in the Cayman Islands and the likelihood that he paid a very small percentage of his income in taxes.

I’m not here to debate the use of offshore accounts. I personally feel that taxes should remain low on principle, but it is a line of attack that Democrats will use to vilify Romney in the general. Another line of attack will be Romney’s refusal to release information pertaining to his bundlers. This can been seen in a Washington Post editorial titled "Why won’t Romney release his tax returns?" from January 11th:

Tax returns offer information not available on the financial disclosure forms that are legally required of candidates, including their charitable deductions and use of tax shelters. Tax information could be especially revealing in the case of Mr. Romney and his extensive investment income, which may be why he has been reluctant to release it. During his 1994 Senate race, Mr. Romney called on Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D) to release his tax returns and show he had “nothing to hide.”Neither candidate released his tax information. Such secrecy will not stand for a presidential nominee.

The identity of a candidate’s bundlers is similarly important. Campaign finance laws limit individual contributions to a candidate to $2,500 per election ($5,000 if you include the primary and general election campaigns), but bundlers haul in tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars by tapping extensive donor networks. Knowing to whom and for how much candidates are indebted is essential information, of which candidates and their advisers are exquisitely aware. Yet under current law the only bundlers whose identities candidates must disclose are registered lobbyists. That information is useful but insufficient: A CEO who bundles $500,000 for a candidate can have as much influence as the company’s Washington lobbyist. Why should this knowledge be kept from voters?

The New York Times agrees:

It is not too much to ask someone seeking the nation’s highest office to sacrifice some personal privacy to reassure voters that they have no hidden entanglements.

And this is not the only place where secrecy has been a problem. Unlike Mr. Obama or John McCain, or George W. Bush in earlier contests, this year’s presidential hopefuls have refused to identify the “bundlers” who reel in many hundreds of thousands of dollars in contributions for their campaigns, disclosing only those bundlers who are registered lobbyists, as the law requires.

Only Mitt Romney’s campaign can save itself (and possibly the GOP as a whole) a lot of future headaches by releasing the information in question. If they continue to stone-wall, the left and their friends in the media can imply anything they want the general public to believe, as to why Romney is being so secretive.

I implore Mitt Romney’s campaign to release Romney’s tax records, his jobs numbers claim, and the information about his bundlers, in a day in age when crony capitalism and insider trading rules Washington DC at the expense of the nation.

You can do the same by emailing the Romney campaign at: info@mittromney.com

Via snail mail at:

Mitt Romney for President
P.O. Box 149756
Boston, MA 02114-9756

Or by phone at: 857-288-3500

Update by Doug: Governor Palin’s admonition that Mitt Romney back up his claim of creating 100,000 jobs is looking more prescient every day.  Independent fact checkers are finding it impossible to verify, via Ryan Lizza at The New Yorker (emphasis mine):

Romney insisted that his great achievement in life has been creating  jobs—specifically, 100,000 jobs while at Bain. As The Wall Street Journal  and others have now made clear, “creating jobs” was never a metric that Bain  used to define success, and, frankly, is not a metric that any company uses to  define success. Independent fact-checkers have declared Romney’s 100,000 figure  somewhere between phony and unverifiable. It is now one of the most important  claims of this campaign for journalists to substantiate. I don’t think it’s an  exaggeration to say that Romney’s success depends on whether that job-creation  statement withstands scrutiny.

Fantastic.  Romney’s apologists assure us that the two greatest rationales for Mitt’s nomination are his alleged electability and job creation record.  The former is looking increasingly dubious, and those looking into the latter find it somewhere between "phony and unverifiable".  Multiple Choice Mitt already has a well-deserved reputation as a serial flip-flopper, and if he’s also seen as someone prone to making things up (e.g. 100,000 jobs created), nobody will believe anything he says…least of all the independents that all of those brilliant Republican insiders insist will be in Mitt’s corner come November.  Color me skeptical.

Of course if Romney would simply point us to the data which backs his claim up, as Governor Palin advises above, this problem would disappear as fast as Mitt changes his position on an issue.  I await this information with baited breath.

 



Tags: , , , , , , ,

Comment Policy: The Editors reserve the right to delete any comments which in their sole discretion are deemed false or misleading, profane, pornographic, defamatory, harassment, name calling, libelous, threatening, or otherwise inappropriate. Additionally, the Editors reserve the right to ban any registered poster who, in their sole discretion, violates the terms of use. Do not post any information about yourself reasonably construed as private or confidential. Conservatives4Palin and its contributors are not liable if users allow others to contact them offsite.

  • excopconservative

    Romney is not releasing his bundlers’ names so that he can repay them handsomely if he is elected without being accused of crony capitalism.  The Democrats will focus on a class warfare campaign and who better to use it against than Romney?  He is tailor made for their 2012 campaign.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/John-Jones/1456322659 John Jones

      Tailor made to lose…..

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Pete-Petretich/100002088167892 Pete Petretich

      OWS is all about running against Romney.

  • $3069072

    Nice, Stacy–the grassroots prevail!

    So, did Obama release his tax returns? And will he be required to? Or can he hide behind certain structures as President?

    Barack & Michele Obama are part of the 1%. We should hammer that home, too.

    • Min Max

      Don’t forget his academic records too! I don’t believe he’s as bright as advertised.

      • wodiej

        If he was you know the liberals would be shouting it from the rooftops.

    • wodiej

      Obama hasn’t released any of his records-school, medical, work-nothing. The first thing he did as president was have them sealed.

    • http://sonic.net/~ckelly/Seekay/ Repack Rider

      "So, did Obama release his tax returns?"

      Actually, he did.  Romney is the only candidate in living memory who didn’t.  It is not required, but every candidate who ever got elected has done it.

      The reason Romney is hedging is that we all know he paid half the rate us working stiffs paid, on millions of dollars he made because he was already rich.  That sort of income is not available to people like me, a self-employed, six-day-a-week working man.  It is a stark reminder that the rich have rigged the system for their own benefit, and how out of touch with real people Romney is.

      When people seek to conceal something, other people want to know why.

  • Steve_Flesher

    Stacy, thank you once again for asking the tough questions and articulating it so clearly.  Articles like this and tonight’s debate coupled together let me know that perhaps its not too late for the people — we the people — to have our say.

  • John_Frank

    Stacy, an excellent post. Thank you.

    FYI. During the course of last nights debate, the job creation number claimed by Romney was 120k.

    He stated:

    "Four of the companies that we invested in ended up today having some one hundred twenty thousand jobs."

    So, the job creation number has gone from 100K to 100k net to thousands and now to 120k.

    • wpmwindsong

      Wonderful.  That is four companies.  And how many jobs were in the companies when Bain invested in them?  Maybe they had 150,000 jobs.    They obviously had jobs when Bain invested in them. 

      It’s not like they created the companies from scratch.  Maybe 120,000 jobs represent a loss of 30,000 jobs, or only an increase of 10,000 jobs.  You can’t count all the current jobs as jobs gained.   That is Obama type reporting, ie "new or saved jobs".  .

      And what about the other over 100+ companies.  What was their record of jobs lost and gained? 

      • John_Frank

        The four companies that Romney is referencing are four of the start ups that Bain Capital invested in through its venture capital firm when Romney was with Bain Capital. The total jobs number referenced includes the activity of these four start ups long after Romney left Bain Capital.

        Romney is ignoring his previous claims of helping to create 100,000 thousand jobs, or thousand jobs.

        Romney is also ignoring entirely:

        - The net jobs created or lost at the companies that Bain Capital invested in through its private equity group and that were under Bain Capital management during the time that Romney was at Bain Capital.

        - The questions raised by Sarah Palin and others viz how many net jobs were created in America versus overseas by companies that Bain Capital invested either through its venture capital group or private equity group while Romney was at Bain Capital.

  • mark1955

    I wonder if MITTEN’S is thinking he released Bachmann too soon?

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Pete-Petretich/100002088167892 Pete Petretich

      That’s Dr. Bachmann to you, sonny boy.

      • mark1955

        Since we are going to be stickler’s for protocol,i believe Madame Bachmann’s correct title is: Dr.Michelle,Thatcher,Tebow,Reagan,Churchill,Ghandi,Thoreau,Martin Luther King,Bachmann!

  • wodiej

    If you want to know who Romney’s bundlers are, go here. 90% of his campaign is financed by Wall Street.

    http://www.opensecrets.org/pres12/contrib.php?id=N00000286

    That is why he doesn’t want to open his books. 

  • GetWhatYouPayFor

    Time to light the fuse on that Breitbart-Bannon bomb. The forces are starting to align. Feel the tremors? There is an earthquake in our future.

  • conservativemama

    If Romney has something to hide and doesn’t air it now, when we have a chance to correct, then he risks putting Obama back in office for a second term.  I can’t imagine a more selfish act.

    He did his frantic man routine last night when asked about the tax returns.  His stammering when he’s been caught on something is a warning sign that the establishment ignores at its own, and our peril.

    When Romney is the last man standing, when all focus is on him and his weaknesses, then I hope for the deus ex machina………………….Palin to the rescue swooping in to win the nomination.

    That’s my hope and I’m hanging onto it for now.

  • colliemum

    The Romney and GOP campaign managers are eejits.

    Of course Romney must release his bundlers’ names, tax records etc. Also academic and medical records.
    Not just because this needs to be out now, so as to counter Democrats’ slur campaigns, but because he and/or the GOP campaign (should he really get to be The Candidate) can then stand up and demand that Obama does exactly the same – something Obama didn’t do in 2008 and won’t do unless forced.

  • PCR1

    Having watched Newt’s brilliant debate performance last night, and Mitt Romney’s lackluster performance,

    I am convinced that unless Romney – if he is the nominee – has Sarah Palin as his VP, he will lose.

    He simply does not generate any excitement at all.

    It’s McCain redux.

    • http://www.facebook.com/natewebb Nathan Webb

      And now we see the de facto mission statement of C4Palin.  Make Palin Romney’s VP.  Good luck with that.  

      • http://www.facebook.com/people/Pete-Petretich/100002088167892 Pete Petretich

        I wonder if Romney would agree (say, at the convention) to become Sarah’s VP. How could he say no?

        Maybe he will be forced to do it for party unity!

        • http://sonic.net/~ckelly/Seekay/ Repack Rider

          He might agree to the VP if he was not nominated and Sarah was, but it would be hard to fathom SP asking Mitt to do anything with her.

        • http://www.facebook.com/natewebb Nathan Webb

          If you think Palin will be nominated you stand to make a good deal of money. Her chances on intrade are 0.2%.  Mitt’s are 92%.  So for every one dollar you bet on Palin, if she wins, you make $500. 

          Personally I think you will lose your dollar, and have already lost your mind.

          • http://www.facebook.com/people/Pete-Petretich/100002088167892 Pete Petretich

            Are you one of these beltway yahoo’s that claim to know so much, but then keep losing and complaining?

  • arcman46

    We have a President now that refuses to release his records.  We know absolutely nothing about Barack Obama, from the time he was a student to his time in the Illinois state senate.  I am no fan of Romney, but if he is to become the nominee and the future President, please do not make the same mistake.

  • stevethird

    The myth of Mitt’s inevitability is taking deep root here in NH. Lady walks into the store and says "I know you’re not a Mitt guy, but if i can get tickets to the debate (between mitt and Obama) do you want some. I smiled and said "let’s see what happens." I ask "why Romney?" and the automatic answer is "he’s the only one who is electable". Reflexive "non-thinkism" is the common thread between all the "Bots" be they Paulbots, Obots, or Mittbots.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Pete-Petretich/100002088167892 Pete Petretich

      WHY do people think he’s electable? NOBODY SEEMS TO LIKE HIM EXCEPT HIS OWN FAMILY!

      • http://sonic.net/~ckelly/Seekay/ Repack Rider

        How do you know his family likes him?

        • http://www.facebook.com/people/Pete-Petretich/100002088167892 Pete Petretich

          Who really knows looking from the outside, but this seems like a religious duty to Mormons. I don’t mean that in a critical way, it’s just an observation based on my personal experience and travel around the country.

  • stevethird

    In my personal hell, I will be married to Eleanor Clift.  I’ll be a good boy, Lord…I PROMISE !!!

    • conservativemama

      Yikes!   That would be hell.  That woman is such a clear example of all mouth, no brain.

  • conservativemama

    How do we know Romney is electable?  We’re not in the general election.  I have no faith that he can stand up to Obama, the Democratic machine, and the MSM.  The fight we need to engage in requires UNWAVERING courage.  I just don’t see it in Mitt.  What has he ever had to fight for?  I’m learning that he didn’t fight for a 2nd term in Massachusetts because the going looked tough.

    Again I ask, how can it be Romney?

    • stevethird

      It’s particularly aggravating to us, cuz we know the opposite is much more likely to be true.

  • Tammie

    Romney’s endurance can be attributed to his ability to continuously fly below the radar. Releasing documents/records will allow opponents and constituents take aim. Count on Romney to drag his feet. 

  • gwspfan

    Romney’s response last night that he would release his records sometime in April is a joke. He and his advisor’s feel they will have the nomination sewn up by then and it will be safe to release them then. If you have not read Mark America’s article pertaining to this please do so. I agree with him that no one supporting him should vote for Mitts until he releases them. He compared this to Pelosi’s famous statement "You can see what is in the bill after it is voted for". This is a blatant move to quell the demand for his records until he wraps the nomination up. Despicable. We need to ratchet it up and insist they be released now.

  • gwspfan

    Just heard on the news that now Romney is admitting that he only pays 15% on his taxes. I believe there is even more to be told by seeing the returns. Would like to know how much of his money is off shore. The cat is beginning to come out of the bag.

    • colliemum

      That cat*) can’t come out fast enough!

      Mit paying 15% taxes? 
      OWS and the Obama campaign will be delighted to advertise ‘Mitt is one of the 1%’.

      How is the GOP going to sell that?

      *) I hope it ain’t a cat but a big roaring grizzly who is d*mn angry!

  • conservativemama

    How can the GOP establishment be so stupid?  How, how, how????

    Why does anyone, anywhere, anymore think that they can sweep inconvenient truth under the rug?  It never works.  If we have nothing but October surprises with Romney as the nominee then I lay this disaster at the feet of the GOP establishment.

    • gwspfan

      That is why I want all Conservatives to closely inspect his background and expose the October surprises now. If they are found, then I believe Sarah would have a path laid and be triumphant in contesting the nomination at the Convention.

  • IndieDogg

    The Romney-Bots might well come to regret the "rush to judgment" they’re attempting to impose on the Republican nomination process (throw the Romney cheering squad in there, too, like Hot Air, FOX and the rest).

    What happens when your self-declared "front runner" and "as good as nominated" candidate locks up boodles of delegates early and then self-destructs when the door to the basement is flung open?

    You’ve got an unelectable "most-electable" nominee on your hands. What do you do when you get to the convention with a presumptive nominee who’s poll numbers are in the toilet?

    Good luck, GOP king-makers.

    You should probably make sure you’ve got a king before you put the crown on his head.

  • John_Frank

    On the electability issue, Public Policy Polling has conducted a poll which is not good news for Romney:

    Obama up 5 on Romney nationally
    http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2012/01/obama-up-5-on-romney-nationally.html

    Romney’s numbers with moderates and independents are poor and his favorables have turned negative.

    Also, there is the "bailout" issue, which to date has not been aggressively pursued by Romney’s opponents in the GOP Presidential primary:

    Romney’s Skeletons: His Bain Capital Received Millions in Bailouts
    http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/10538-romneys-skeletons-his-bain-capital-received-millions-in-bailouts

Open Thread

Governor Palin’s Tweets