Brad DeLong nails the idiotic attempt to claim Mitt isn't lying when he claims to have retired from Bain in 1999:
It would be very unusual for somebody to have the titles of
not just "CEO" but "President", "Chairman of the Board" and be "sole
stockholder" and to have no responsibilities whatsoever. In fact, I defy
Glenn Kessler to come up with any example of anybody anywhere--save for
Mitt Romney--who has been characterized to the SEC as "sole
stockholder, chairman of the board, chief executive officer, and
president" and also claimed to have no responsibilities whatsoever and
to have merely been a passive investor.
But the Romney
campaign is continuing in post-truth mode. Demanding retractions from
those that dare to suggest that either Mitt must have been lying when he
claimed to still be working at Bain in 2002, or he must by lying now
when he claims to have retired in 1999 (he made both claims in federal
documents that require the truth, under penalty of law).
While the political strategists seem to think this is genius, I think
the average voter can tell when a politician is desperate to change the
subject after being caught in a lie.
Take his CBS interview Friday:
JAN CRAWFORD: Governor Romney, the Obama campaign is saying
that you either committed a felony by lying to the SEC or you are lying
to the American people about when you left Bain capital. What do you say
to that?
GOV. MITT ROMNEY: Well, I think this kind of statement from the Obama
team is really shocking, it's, it's ridiculous, and it's beneath the
dignity of the presidency. Look we just had a report come out that
millions of Americans remain unemployed. [Ignores question completely]
Crawford tries repeatedly to get a straight answer out of Romney without success:
GOV. ROMNEY: I was the owner of a, of the general
partnership but there were investors which included pension funds and
various entities of all kinds that owned the, if you will, the
investments of the firm. But I was the owner of an entity which was a
management entity. That entity was one which I had ownership of until
the time of the retirement program was put in place. But I had no
responsibility whatsoever after February of '99 for the management or
ownership - management, rather, of Bain Capital.
Now this
might appear to be a vigorous denial on camera, but what has Romney
actually said? All he denies is having 'responsibility for the
management' of Bain. He's splitting hairs. Romney was the sole
shareholder, so the only person he would be 'responsible' to was
himself.
What Romney is deliberately obscuring is the fact that since he was never replaced as CEO of the partnership,
he remained an executive officer of the partnership and
every other executive officer of the partnership remained responsible to him.
What matters to most voters is not whether a politician's statements are the
literal truth but whether they can trust him. Voters don't find a prevaricator any more trustworthy than a liar.
Romney has already defined himself as a man who changes his policy
positions as often as his neckties. Now he's defining himself with the
voters as someone who is economical with the truth. And that won't win
him many votes.