Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Factcheck.org misleads to defend Romney (updated)
Obama’s ‘Boss’ Baloney
The Obama campaign strikes another low blow with a TV spot accusing Mitt Romney of “personally” approving a notoriously abusive tax-avoidance scheme and suggesting he may have paid “zero” tax. That’s badly misleading.
It wasn’t Romney who was avoiding taxes, it was Marriott Corp. And there’s no evidence to support the ad’s speculation that Romney himself paid no income tax, or that he did something illegal.
The ad opens with an unsupported insinuation that Romney isn’t releasing more federal income tax returns because some would show he didn’t pay any income tax in those years. The narrator asks, “Did Romney pay 10 percent in taxes? Five percent? Zero? We don’t know.” And the narrator might add, “We have no evidence to support what I just said.” But he doesn’t.
<...>
Romney’s refusal to release more than two years’ worth of tax returns — far fewer than most presidential candidates in recent history — leaves an opening for his opponents to speculate about what he may be hiding. And the ad is correct that we don’t know if, prior to 2010, Romney paid less than 13.9 percent of his income in taxes, as he did in 2010. But the fact is, Romney didn’t claim $70 million in fictional losses for himself, and there’s no direct evidence that he used abusive or illegal methods to reduce his own taxes to zero, as this ad strains to imply.
http://factcheck.org/2012/08/obamas-boss-baloney/
The Obama campaign strikes another low blow with a TV spot accusing Mitt Romney of “personally” approving a notoriously abusive tax-avoidance scheme and suggesting he may have paid “zero” tax. That’s badly misleading.
It wasn’t Romney who was avoiding taxes, it was Marriott Corp. And there’s no evidence to support the ad’s speculation that Romney himself paid no income tax, or that he did something illegal.
The ad opens with an unsupported insinuation that Romney isn’t releasing more federal income tax returns because some would show he didn’t pay any income tax in those years. The narrator asks, “Did Romney pay 10 percent in taxes? Five percent? Zero? We don’t know.” And the narrator might add, “We have no evidence to support what I just said.” But he doesn’t.
<...>
Romney’s refusal to release more than two years’ worth of tax returns — far fewer than most presidential candidates in recent history — leaves an opening for his opponents to speculate about what he may be hiding. And the ad is correct that we don’t know if, prior to 2010, Romney paid less than 13.9 percent of his income in taxes, as he did in 2010. But the fact is, Romney didn’t claim $70 million in fictional losses for himself, and there’s no direct evidence that he used abusive or illegal methods to reduce his own taxes to zero, as this ad strains to imply.
http://factcheck.org/2012/08/obamas-boss-baloney/
Romney hasn't released "two years’ worth of tax returns.
Mitt Romney Taxes For 2010 Not Fully Disclosed
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/18/mitt-romney-taxes-2010_n_1683084.html
Updated to add these points about Factcheck's red herring claims.
The tax scheme didn’t benefit Romney, and the fictional losses were not his. The company involved was Marriott Corp, not Romney or Bain Capital. But the ad gives no hint of this.
The ad doesn't claim Romney made money on the scam. He was the chief auditor so he "personally approved" it as the two articles mentioned.
CNN didn’t report this. Although the ad prominently features the CNN logo as the source of the printed quotes, they are actually the opinions of two outside tax experts with Democratic leanings.
Factcheck attacks the messengers, and then goes on to cite the Bloomberg article. Was it also written by a Democratic donor? Does that negate the fact that Marriott was involved in SOB and Romney was the head auditor?
Marriott isn’t solely responsible for “one of the largest tax avoidance schemes in history.” Viewers may get the mistaken impression that Romney — actually Marriott — is solely to blame for “one of the largest tax avoidance schemes in history.” Not true. It was a strategy used by many taxpayers that resulted in billions in lost revenue.
The ad specifically states that this was "part" of SOB. Get your head out of Romney's ass.
“Avoidance” is not illegal. The casual viewer may miss the important distinction between legal avoidance and illegal fraud or tax evasion. Combining “avoidance” with loaded terms like “scheme” and “notorious” and “scandal” and “fictional losses” further suggests possible tax fraud, but there’s no evidence Romney broke any law.
That's Romney problem, and his actions speak louder than his apologists.
New Obama Ad ‘Son Of Boss’ Pushes Romney On Taxes
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021100741
Mitt Romney Started Bain Capital With Money From Families Tied To Death Squads
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014187901
CNN: Did Romney enable Marriott International's abusive tax shelter?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021093850
Edited for clarity and relevance.
12 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
