Seems unlikely to me - I don’t think they could get them legally and I think it’s very unlikely anyone from the Republican side would help them. Romney’s actions make it pretty clear there is some stuff he doesn’t want to release, and that’s all they really need to know- they’ll keep pressing.
I bet you they somehow get leaked eventually, at least one or two years. An october surprise, perhaps?
Any release of the returns that is not performed by Romney would have Romney screaming bloody murder, at a volume that would totally drown out any useful commentary the President’s re-election team could put out.
That said, an October Surprise might consist of the Romney camp leaking the returns to a liberal blogger with more enthusiasm than sense…
I believe most confidential gov’t records are in systems that record who accesses what record and when. So if the returns were leaked without Romney’s go ahead, it would be pretty trivial for the inevitable investigators to find the leaker. And the resulting scandal would likely dwarf whatever is actually in Romney’s returns, so I can’t imagine we’ll see a leak.
In anycase, there isn’t really any mystery around why Obama is pressing Romney to release his returns. So there isn’t much reason to posit his having secret info.
(wasn’t there a minor scandalette when someone was caught accessing candidates gov’t records a cycle or two ago? I have a vague memory of it, I think it just ended up being a bored low-level gov’t employee)
That assumes that a leak would come from the government records. I doubt Romney does his own returns so there’s at least an accountant who would have access. And somewhere I read about Romney supplying copies to McCain when he was under consideration to be his running mate in 2008. (Don’t know for sure if that happened, or what years’ returns might have been included.) So those people, or anyone who has access to their records, are potential sources of a leak, too.
This is what I was remembering. The article also mentions an earlier case where people in Bush I’s State Dept. accessed then candidate Bill Clinton’s passport records. But it does sound like the State dept. system keeps tabs on who access what and when, and keeps special track of who accesses VIP files. I’d imagine the IRS does the same.
I’d be pretty surprised if the McCain campaign hadn’t long since destroyed any confidential records that were given to them during the VP search, and any accountant doing the leaking would be risking their career and jail time.
Would it be that hard to leak annonymously through Wikileaks? That would be an interesting twist to the campaign. I suspect that there is something seriously damaging in those returns so Romney is not going to release them. However he is in serious trouble over the issue even if the polls don’t show it yet. Most voters aren’t paying attention yet but the issue is going to remain a running sore which the Obama campaign will keep poking till Election day. It fits perfectly into their overall narrative and the Beltway consensus is on their side on this issue.
There is no personal anonymity in presidential campaigns. That, by itself, is a problem for Romney, but it keeps the other side from being unscrupulous with records. (As has been said, Romney has to prefer the question, “what’s he hiding?” to the question of what’s actually in his numerous accounts.)
It’s odd that the Romey campaign is criticizing Obama for rewarding his donors, when everyone knows that a Romney presidency will result in massive amounts of money sent right into his donors’ pockets, and even more into the pockets of his anonymous Super-Pac allies.
Is there anything to prevent Romney from releasing bogus returns? Either publicly or through Wikileaks? If there is something in the real returns that he would find damaging, he could take that out, re-do the math, and release them. If all the information in the returns is otherwise confidential, who would be in a position to detect the difference and blow the whistle?
Say his money came from illegal drugs, all reported. Still think they are of no concern to us. I’m not saying they are, but how can we tell for sure? And no one put a gun to the guys head to force him to run. There are all sorts of jobs which require background checks - if you don’t want people calling your former neighbors to check on you, don’t apply for them.
This assumes that the damaging part can be isolated from the rest of the tax return. I am not an expert on tax law but I suspect that for a really complicated tax return it’s difficult to remove a big chunk without producing discrepancies. I don’t see Romney as the kind of person who would take such risks. Perhaps his team could release it through Wikileaks but then if there are signs of tampering it wouldn’t have much credibility.
It’s been reported that Romney gave McCain’s camp 23 years of tax returns in 2008. So it seems like a leak of his tax returns from the relevant period could only come from someone involved with the McCain campaign or through someone at the IRS. I presume that accessing Romney’s tax records and publishing them would be a crime and probably a felony. It would look Nixonian and it would hurt Obama much more than it would hurt Romney even if Obama was not directly responsible. So I doubt his campaign knows what’s in those returns. They know it’s something that might look bad for Romney and that’s all they need to know.
There are some rumors that Romney might just put out some of those tax returns Friday afternoon, hoping that relatively few people will pay attention.
This was mentioned in the business thread, but it’s really more about the tax returns. Anne Romney thinks “And we’ve given all you people need to know and understand about our financial situation and about how we live our life.”
Here’s the full exchange - it’s even funnier than the “nail ladies” lady -
So Lovey admits that there are “so many things that will be open again for more attack” if they show their tax returns so we should all just shut up and accept that her husband knows how to bring jobs back to America (unlike, you know, his actual track record for destroying American jobs.)
I laughed SO. HARD.
I wanted to highlight this portion of the Ann Romney quote:
This attitude seems to dovetail with an analysis of Mitt’s recent disclosures byJosh Marshall at TPM (or, more accurately, one of his readers):
Like the rest of the Masters of the Universe, he just can’t believe anybody would question his personal image as a stand-up guy, to the point that he’s insulted by the suggestion (much less the request that he prove it by releasing his returns).
I wouldn’t be surprised if there is nothing really damaging in his returns. He just doesn’t like the idea of the serfs questioning the nobles.
Really damaging like go to jail damaging? No. Really damaging like lose the election damaging? Very possibly.
If you look at what the bankers say, first they see absolutely nothing wrong with stuff like getting over a million bucks for not being CEO of Bain. They feel they need and deserve that money. Second, they are sure that everything they do is in the long term benefit of the economy. Third, usually when something like the LIBOR scandal is revealed, they say something like Dimond that it isn’t in the traditions of the bank. Bull. Doing everything possible to protect the bank and increase profits is absolutely in the tradition of the bank. Getting caught isn’t.
I’m betting that Romney’s returns show stuff - like stashing money offshore - that is totally in line with what his peers do, and only a problem because it will be hard to explain to a public for whom $85k in speaking fees isn’t chump change.
It is the application of the income gap to politics. Romney would do great if he were running for president of the 1%, and could show his returns with no fear. The rest of us, maybe not.
It’s interesting to read this in light of reports of Tim Geithner’s behavior in Neil Barofsky’s new book (which, admittedly, is just Barofsky’s take on the subject).
From here: Timothy Geithner Peppered TARP Inspector General Barofsky With F-Bombs: Book | HuffPost Impact
I have to ask, are the latest round of polls that show a tightening of the race worrying to anybody? These polls were ostensibly taken during the heat of the Bain attack ad barrage and they only indicate that the race is narrowing and not that the attacks are working. Perhaps polls this early will be an unreliable test of the Bain attacks’ effectiveness, and polls a few weeks out may be more accurate. Who knows.
It’s interesting to note that this race is probably going to be neck and neck until at least the debates, where a clear winner will presumably start to emerge in the polls. What is your take-away from these latest polls?
Since the electoral college is what matters, here is the map from the same site. It has been virtually unchanged since the first of July. Draw your own conclusions.
I love this part. I’ve been watching a lot of American Greed lately, and one thing that almost every one of the crooks portrayed has in common is that they gave a large amount of money to charity.
Here’s a good article listing 10 people who committed major financial fraud and donated millions to charity, including Bernie Madoff, Ken Lay and Michael Milken. At this point, when I hear that someone has given millions to charity, I’m tempted to wonder who they stole it from.
Yeah, I check RCP every day, and they seem to be the most reliable source insofar as interpreting polls is concerned. The take-away that I tend to get from these things in general is that they don’t indicate much when it comes to individual polls; it’s only when you see a plurality of similar results that interpretations are likely to be more accurate.
On that note, the latest Virginia poll is what most pundits have been discussing today in the news outlets, at least from what I gleaned this morning. An absolute tie is a far cry away from the eight point advantage that Obama held over Mittens in the PPP poll a couple weeks ago.