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

CTyankee

(63,912 posts)
Fri Aug 3, 2012, 08:47 AM Aug 2012

On Morning Joe Van Jones just said that Mitt Romney has probably focus grouped the tax

returns issue and found that if he didn't pay any taxes it will be even worse than the stonewalling he is doing now. So that is why Romney continues his stonewalling.

Van just might be right on this. If it looks disastrous to us now, it can probably get a LOT worse if the truth comes out...

16 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

CTyankee

(63,912 posts)
3. Yes, but if true it is a disappointment to me as a Dem...
Fri Aug 3, 2012, 09:06 AM
Aug 2012

I'm hoping for the real tax returns to come out in October to finish the Mittster off.

mucifer

(23,561 posts)
2. It amazes me that the republicans can block cabinet nominees and mayors have to
Fri Aug 3, 2012, 09:06 AM
Aug 2012

give their tax returns. But, it's cool if rmoney doesn't

CTyankee

(63,912 posts)
7. I'm afraid you are right. They and the foam at the mouth racists will vote for Romney
Fri Aug 3, 2012, 09:19 AM
Aug 2012

no matter what.

marshall

(6,665 posts)
10. Why isn't the IRS on this?
Fri Aug 3, 2012, 09:38 AM
Aug 2012

If he didn't pay taxes for a DECADE, surely they will have some kind of audit and demand the money he owes.

Zen Democrat

(5,901 posts)
11. Romney already admitted as much.
Fri Aug 3, 2012, 09:50 AM
Aug 2012

He said he's not releasing anything more because Dems would pick apart his returns and make political hay. That's straight-up admitting that there is damning evidence in the returns. I think he not only didn't pay taxes, but also didn't take advantage of the Swiss bank account amnesty, which would put him in legal jeopardy.

 

magical thyme

(14,881 posts)
14. whoa, now there's a twist. I assume he *did* take the '09 amnesty
Fri Aug 3, 2012, 10:03 AM
Aug 2012

for fear that his name would be among the 4,400 or so that UBS released. I reas somewhere that he banked with UBS and left it unclear on some forms that he filed whether it was the U.S. legal branch or the Swiss secret branch.

I've also assumed that his claim to have paid all he legally owes was technically true, and wondered exactly *when* did he pay what he legally owed. Did he hide enough money in Swiss accounts for a decade or so -- say 1999 when he supposedly left Bain until 2009 -- to pay no taxes for that decade. And then, when he was about to get caught, take the amnesty and pay all that he owed legally to avoid going to jail?

Or did he have the balls to pray he wasn't among the released names and try to hang onto every cent?

Frustratedlady

(16,254 posts)
15. He may try to hide it, but in the back of his mind, he surely realizes "someone" knows...
Fri Aug 3, 2012, 11:45 AM
Aug 2012

something. McCain, for one. The mystery informant, for two. The IRS, for three. His CPAs and their office staff, for four or more. And, of course, his Bain connections and his own family.

So, even though he might pull off the secrecy with us, others know the truth. How could he hold his head up before them?

Oh, yeah! He's so accustomed to lying, it wouldn't bother him...or, would it?

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»On Morning Joe Van Jones ...