… at least they seem to think so. Should we also praise people for not setting buildings on fire and not shooting people? Should we be telling people “Congratulations on not being a criminal.”?
Ann Romney on the matter of tax releases:
“We have been very transparent to what’s legally required of us. There’s going to be no more tax releases given.”
Well, that’s very nice, but since even Mitt’s releases for 2010 were not fully disclosed, it shouldn’t come as any surprise that we still have questions. What might be in the other years?
“Ammunition.” Sorry, what was that, Ann?
Mrs. Romney said if they release any more information, “it will only give them more ammunition.”
In regards to their finances, she said “there’s nothing we’re hiding.”
So, they aren’t hiding anything, but the nothing that they are hiding would give ammunition to Democrats and the media? That seems perfectly sensible and not in the least contradictory.
And even though their releases might comply will the bare minimum the law requires, they might be hiding previous violations in their taxes, covered by the 2009 Swiss Bank Account Amnesty. However, even though that amnesty retroactively – there’s that word again – eliminates legal liability, it doesn’t remove political liability.
Over at ElectoralVote, it is pointed out that Romney promised to release his 2011 taxes before the election. Now, since he knew before last year that he would be running for the Presidency, it might be that there is nothing there the least bit shady. But even if that is true, it will bring attention back to the taxes Romney refuses to release, and the fact that he is more secretive by far than any candidate for American high office in modernity.