Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Perhaps you mistook them for somebody who gives a damn.

The gop is a fucking disgrace.

It could be worse. Vance could have said “post-menopausal sows.” Waiting for that audiotape to surface.

Let me eat cake. The rest of you could stand to lose some weight, frankly.

The choice is between normal and crazy.

“woke” is the new caravan.

“Cheese and Kraken paired together for the appetizer trial.”

Good lord, these people are nuts.

Republicans want to make it harder to vote and easier for them to cheat.

So many bastards, so little time.

I like you, you’re my kind of trouble.

Republicans don’t lie to be believed, they lie to be repeated.

“I never thought they’d lock HIM up,” sobbed a distraught member of the Lock Her Up Party.

Black Jesus loves a paper trail.

Sadly, media malpractice has become standard practice.

… riddled with inexplicable and elementary errors of law and fact

In short, I come down firmly on all sides of the issue.

Of course you can have champagne before noon. That’s why orange juice was invented.

If you still can’t see these things even now, maybe politics isn’t your forte and you should stop writing about it.

The lights are all blinking red.

We are builders in a constant struggle with destroyers. let’s win this.

Teach a man to fish, and he’ll sit in a boat all day drinking beer.

Speaker Mike Johnson is a vile traitor to the House and the Constitution.

It’s always darkest before the other shoe drops.

You are here: Home / Mitt Romney is Hiding Behind Journalistic Hackery Disguised as ‘Fact-Checking’

Mitt Romney is Hiding Behind Journalistic Hackery Disguised as ‘Fact-Checking’

by | 58 Comments

This post is in: 

Robert Parry at Consortium News nails why Factcheck.org and Glenn Kessler are an embarrassment to journalism:

Self-styled “independent fact-checkers” at the Annenberg Center and the neoconservative-dominated Washington Post have positioned themselves as ardent defenders of Mitt Romney’s claims that his Bain Capital tenure ended in 1999 despite questions raised by contradictory information submitted by Romney himself.

Indeed, the behavior of these “fact-checkers” is rapidly becoming the journalism scandal of Campaign 2012 as the likes of Brooks Jackson at Annenberg’s FactCheck.org and the Post’s Glenn Kessler act more as querulous lawyers protecting Romney than as journalists seeking the actual facts surrounding Romney’s curious business narrative.

Romney is full of shit. And, if yesterday’s blogorrhea from Erick Erickson is any indication, it seems that the Romney campaign is selling a narrative that private equity investment firms are complicated, as is the work they do, and it is way over the head of the Obama campaign and the average voter.

To that, I say, “ninja, please.”

Reader Interactions

58Comments

  1. 1.

    Hill Dweller

    They’re just throwing shit at the wall hoping something will stick at this point. They know this stuff is hurting Willard.

  2. 2.

    gregor

    Ann and Mitt will be great in a Cialis commercial shot in and around their La Jolla beach house.

    May be that is what they are after anyway, just as all the governor of Alaska wanted was her own reality show for her and her uniquely dysfunctional family.

  3. 3.

    Handy

    If they have to use the word “fact” or “fact checker” in their name you know they are full of it.

  4. 4.

    Dee Loralei

    I haven’t watched Chris Hayes show today, did the Bain guy tattle on Romney, or did he agree with everything Romney said?

  5. 5.

    IowaOldLady

    The Bain guy backed up Romney. Let me see if I can render what he said. The paragraph below is a paraphrase of him, so not me.

    He said that when Romney left, his departure agreement was complicated because Romney had created this organization which was generating enormous wealth and they had to decide how to compensate him for what happened after he left. And that agreement also had to address what would happen when everyone else left too. And Romney was hard to get hold of to take part in the negotiations. The guy said he never saw Romney there.

    Hayes didn’t push him terribly hard, though he did ask about the $100,000+ salary Romney drew and talked about how foreign that was to most people. I can’t recall the answer to that.

  6. 6.

    robertdsc-PowerBook

    “Ninja, please?” LMAO. Great job, ABL! A Michelle Obama side eye picture would be the cherry on top.

  7. 7.

    BudP

    I would predict that we won’t see Mitt’s returns until he’s officially nominated, if ever. Dems should seek to press these questions…

    Exactly what was Mitt’s 1999 – 2002 salary?

    Did anyone at Bain make more than Mitt during those years?

  8. 8.

    Walker

    @IowaOldLady:

    He said that when Romney left, his departure agreement was complicated because Romney had created this organization which was generating enormous wealth and they had to decide how to compensate him for what happened after he left

    He was the sole stockowner. There is nothing to negotiate. He gets all profits after everyone else is paid.

  9. 9.

    catclub

    @BudP: The tax returns are toxic becuase he was making huge amounts of money from Bain during that time — when Bain WAS doing all the outsourcing and fetus recycling. He is STILL afraid of the GOP far right wing.

    IG Farben did not actually run the ovens and zyklon-B killings, they just profited from it.

  10. 10.

    Redshift

    @Walker:

    He was the sole stockowner. There is nothing to negotiate. He gets all profits after everyone else is paid.

    Ah, but remember Romney’s agreement when they started Bain, which guaranteed that he would make a bundle even if it tanked, and they would let him go back to his old job and pretend that he had nothing to do with it? All profits would never be enough for Romney, he would have to get some guaranteed pay, too.

  11. 11.

    IowaOldLady

    @Walker:

    Well, and why was Romney drawing any kind of salary if he wasn’t working for Bain?

    If you look at from the point of view of working people, this is incomprehensible. To me, it feels like there’s a world of money that really is beyond my understanding, just like Erikson says. They don’t operate by the rules or even life habits the rest of us live by. For all I know, it’s legal. It’s also infuriating.

  12. 12.

    WereBear

    Ya know, all I’d have to do was go around buying up companies because I have enough money to do so, make them do a bunch of things that are long-term disastrous but short-term profitable, like outsource all the jobs, because now I own them, and if that doesn’t work to my satisfaction, I can sell them off for their net worth, thus transferring all the wealth to myself, because I’m moving on like a starfish that just ate another oyster.

    I’ve decreased the world’s net worth, and given it to myself at a stunning discount, but I won’t care because I have it all, instead of spreading it among towns and states and countries.

    It’s not any kind of genius at work. It simply takes enough money to do so.

  13. 13.

    Todd

    My Facebook status update today:

    Why not just straight out say “I ran Bain during those years. In the gloriousness that is the role of private equity in the American economy, sometimes you have to trash companies and jobs and offshore processes in order to supply the grease that is creative destruction. And if I can do it while stuffing my pockets with cash, then the losing workers and communities should just work harder for whatever new opportunities come their way, for less money if need be.”
    …
    Since that is the system that he and his contributors seem to be championing, you’d think he’d be happily defending it instead of running from it. Listening to him and his surrogates, you get the feeling that he’s shaking his fingers at us and lecturing “I did not…have a role…at that company…Bain Capital…during those years”. Meanwhile, his SEC filings, Massachusetts election testimony, news stories at the time and deals are the blue dress.

    Yes, I’m trolling my FB friends. Don’t judge me.

  14. 14.

    ChrisNYC

    So fantastic that Mitt’s big event this month is his trip to the actual Olympics. You know, since he and his $70000 a year horse at the London Games will surely distract attention from all this stuff about …. income taxes and income and … the Olympics. What the hell is wrong with that campaign?

  15. 15.

    Kane

    @IowaOldLady: Excellent synopsis. He did seem visibly uncomfortable when asked if Romney had returned to attend meetings. There’s a swallow with eyes diverting to the side when he says, I never saw him.

    Also, Romney was busy saving the Olympics, which the guy repeated like a mantra.

  16. 16.

    RD

    What’s really funny is that Erickson’s attempt to equate the Bain controversy with birthers immediately backfired when RedState’s actual birthers started bitching that they were being marginalized.

  17. 17.

    22over7

    @ChrisNYC:

    Just a guess at this point, but wouldn’t it be nice if Obama’s people helped some journalists (David Corn, Josh Marshall, Boston Globe) with the sole purpose of getting this story out there, complete with fantastically-produced attack ads, just in time for Mitt to go to London and get his picture taken with his wife’s horse.

  18. 18.

    Legalize

    The “retroactive retirement” thing from Gillespie was a very considerate gift to Team O. Also too, lying about Kerry’s tax returns. Good work, geniuses, compare yourselves to the Kerry campaign.

    My favorite part of this is how the wingnuts are collectively telling themselves how stupid Obama is, and how desperate he must be to be trotting this stuff out now. All Willard has to do, according to them, is sit down with the American people and simply explain to them how totally awesome capitalism is.

  19. 19.

    Todd

    @Kane:

    He did seem visibly uncomfortable when asked if Romney had returned to attend meetings.

    Runs afoul of that Massachusetts residency testimony, don’t it?

  20. 20.

    Hill Dweller

    Arianna’s vanity project has found a document listing Willard as a Managing Member at Bain in Dec. ’02.

  23. 23.

    Jim, Foolish Literalist

    @Legalize: I’ve always thought of Gillespie as one of their shrewder operatives. Cheap, nasty and dishonest, but a shrewd manipulator of the SCLM. I think “retroactive retirement” may make everyone forget “etch-a-sketch”.

  24. 24.

    beltane

    @Hill Dweller: Yes, but “Managing Member” should never be taken to mean that he took part in managing Bain. Only common people who don’t understand how things work could read “Managing Member” and come away thinking it meant Mitt was a managing member.

  27. 27.

    Villago Delenda Est

    Rmoney is such a dipshit that he’s trying to hide behind a couple of guys who share with him top billing in this particular foofarah.

    Idiot. Every time they try to defend him with this banquet of bullshit, they subject themselves to more withering attacks, and Rmoney cannot help but be harmed by the collateral damage.

  28. 28.

    Sly

    @IowaOldLady:
    It took three years for a corporation that specializes in ownership and management transfers to work out the details of the departure agreement of its own CEO and sole stockholder?

    Ed Gillespie’s “retroactive retirement” spin makes more sense.

  29. 29.

    Ash Can

    @ChrisNYC: The McCain campaign took the walking disaster that was Sarah Palin and made her look better — only somewhat, and only for a limited time, but they managed it. The geniuses running Romney’s campaign have taken the walking disaster that is Mitt Romney and have made him look progressively worse.

    Do we actually know who’s running Romney’s campaign, and are we absolutely sure that none of them are named Debbie Wasserman-Schultz?

  30. 30.

    JPL

    Gosh Darn, Huff Post has another document showing Mitt as managing partner in 2002. link

    Get Kessler the smelling salts. Of course, he will say well it was a mistake because..

  31. 31.

    Jim, Foolish Literalist

    This email to TPM is from somebody in finance, and sums up pretty much every hunch I’ve had about Romney, our delicate, thin-skinned banisters in general:

    What’s odder is that the entire Romney campaign seems to have the same inability to engage on Bain on any other level than personal indignation. And indignation, as you correctly note, is for whimps.
    My guess is that this reflects the same rigid, top-down, sycophantic management structure that Wall Street loves — which if it didn’t cause the 2008 financial crisis, a least contributed to it. The campaign can’t really be any cooler or capable than Mitt is himself — which, when it comes to dealing with criticism, clearly ain’t much.

  32. 32.

    Legalize

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist:
    It has that “I was for it, before I was against it” quality. I’m pretty sure Gillespie is a mole for David Axelrod – who, this morning, said something about how he doesn’t know if Willard committed a felony or not. And Cutter said Willard should stop whining. I also dug Durbin’s “scalded cat” line.

    Willard is weak and shifty. The narrative is set.

    And we haven’t even gotten to Stericycle yet.

  33. 33.

    thalarctos

    It appears that if he was in charge of Bain, he was lying to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and the Federal Election Commission, and if he wasn’t in charge of Bain, he was lying to his investors (and possibly the SEC).

    Not a good spot to be in.

  34. 34.

    Kane

    A former partner at Bain Capital, who worked at the firm when Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney was in charge, acknowledged on Sunday that Romney was “legally” the chief executive officer and sole owner of Bain Capital until 2002, not 1999 as Romney has previously stated, and said that Romney was engaged in a “complicated set of negotiations” over his exit pay for at least two years after he says he left the firm.

    “Mitt’s names were on the documents as the chief executive and sole owner of the company,” Ed Conard, who served as a partner at Bain Capital from 1993 to 2007, said in an exclusive interview with Up w/ Chris Hayes. Asked again if Romney was chief executive officer of Bain Capital from 1999 to 2002, Conard said, “Legally, on documents, I suppose, yes.”

    There’s more here plus the video clip is up as well:

    http://upwithchrishayes.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/07/15/12751962-former-bain-capital-partner-says-romney-was-legally-ceo-of-bain-capital-until-2002

  35. 35.

    the Conster

    @thalarctos:

    If he was lying to Massachusetts, guess who would have jurisdiction to investigate? Martha Coakley. Ha ha ha ha Willard.

  36. 36.

    quannlace

    to go to London and get his picture taken with his wife’s horse.

    And don’t forget to remind folks he tried to get tens of thousands of dollars as a tax deduction on that horse.

  37. 37.

    beltane

    @Kane: Assuming this is true, what kind of leader takes three years to negotiate his exit pay? If the 3:00 am phone call comes, would Mitt need 3 years to mull over his options?

  38. 38.

    Villago Delenda Est

    @Kane:

    He.is.fucked.

    And I’m enjoying every second of this. I feel his pain, and it is similar to cuddling after sex. The afterglow is astounding.

    Suffer, OvenMitt. Suffer.

  39. 39.

    Mnemosyne

    @IowaOldLady:

    This is the hidden secret of the purported “Protestant work ethic” — since it’s based in Calvinism, the assumption is that if you’re one of God’s favorites, He will make you rich enough that you don’t have to work. The mere fact of having money is proof that you’re a hard worker, so having to actually do the hard work is a mere detail.

    It’s also another example of Republicans’ favorite pastime, projection. They know perfectly well that the Masters of the Universe they hold up as moral examples don’t really work all that hard, so they try to cover up that fact by bitching about people on welfare who are supposedly leeching off your money like, oh, a CEO who doesn’t show up to board meetings but still gets paid at least $100K a year.

  40. 40.

    Heliopause

    it seems that the Romney campaign is selling a narrative that private equity investment firms are complicated,

    And as I keep saying on the other threads, I’ll take that explanation. It makes him look like an out-of-touch asshole who plays by a different set of rules. Romney’s own version of this is hurting him.

    You FPers can keep trying to develop the maximal conspiracy theory version but I don’t think it will get any traction outside the blogs.

  41. 41.

    pseudonymous in nc

    @Kane:

    Conard said, “Legally, on documents, I suppose, yes.”

    I can’t think of a better summation of how Masters of the Universe think. “Well, I suppose so, if you insist on legal documents meaning something.”

  42. 42.

    Jim, Foolish Literalist

    @Heliopause:

    I’ll take that explanation. It makes him look like an out-of-touch asshole who plays by a different set of rules. Romney’s own version of this is hurting him.

    I keep thinking of that scene in The Queen when Helen Mirren and the rest are baffled by the fact that the proles want the flags at Buckingham Palace lowered to half-staff. “Diana’s not an HRH anymore” they reply in indignant confusion. Don’t these people know the rules?

  44. 44.

    pseudonymous in nc

    @Heliopause:

    And as I keep saying on the other threads, I’ll take that explanation. It makes him look like an out-of-touch asshole who plays by a different set of rules.

    Yep. Most people either work for companies or run companies. They’re not sole stockholders of companies that are sole general partners of partnerships that are sole general partners of partnerships that are sole stockholders of companies. Five-layer corporate dips don’t just look “complicated”, they look tricksy.

  45. 45.

    danielx

    @gregor:

    Nope, Snowbilly Snooki was and is a grifter. She wanted what the Marquis already has more of than he will ever live to spend.

    Indeed, the behavior of these “fact-checkers” is rapidly becoming the journalism scandal of Campaign 2012 as the likes of Brooks Jackson at Annenberg’s FactCheck.org and the Post’s Glenn Kessler act more as querulous lawyers protecting Romney than as journalists seeking the actual facts surrounding Romney’s curious business narrative.

    More of this, please. However…the Villager narrative is already becoming obvious. This is merely a matter of misinterpretation, just like “poor Scooter’s” faulty memory was just a little matter of perjury about outing a CIA agent, nothing like serious as lying about a blowjob. (“Rule of law! Rule of law! Perjury!”) Obviously a former investment banker with a trained analytical mind is not to blamed for the ignorance of those who suppose the titles of CEO and chairman of the board mean that a person actually is CEO and chairman of the board.

    And so it goes.

  47. 47.

    Kane

    @beltane:

    what kind of leader takes three years to negotiate his exit pay?

    A greedy one. Apparently it takes longer to negotiate the exit pay of someone in the privileged one percent than it does to throw people out into the streets and outsource their jobs.

  48. 48.

    WereBear

    @beltane: I really can’t understand why Romney is going out of his way to piss off his Beltway allies.

    Because he doesn’t think in terms of allies, or quid pro quo, or even How Things Actually Work.

    I’m almost convinced that Romney is actually some kind of White Horse Prophecy meets Manchurian Candidate genetic experiment. He’s been sheltered and coddled and sucked up to his entire life. He actually thinks he deserves every bit of his privilege; he’s probably baffled that his political goals have been so elusive. He’s never been told NO in his life.

    If he had a psyche left, it would melt down in this coming Reality Storm. But since he shows no sign of really experiencing human emotions as we understand them, he’ll simply ignore the warning signs, decide that his underlings screwed up, fire everyone, and go off on some more rich guy fun stuff.

    He’s so rich he can literally afford not to care.

  49. 49.

    RD

    @Heliopause:

    You FPers can keep trying to develop the maximal conspiracy theory version but I don’t think it will get any traction outside the blogs

    You must one those purist progressives who consider “competition” and “winning” to be vulgar and heartless.

    Enjoy your irrelevance.

  50. 50.

    Roger Moore

    @Todd:

    Runs afoul of that Massachusetts residency testimony, don’t it?

    It’s the classic problem for perpetual liars; they tell different stories to different people and get tripped up when the people they’ve been lying to compare notes. He’s just in especially big trouble because some of his statements were made under oath, so there are legal problems if they’re materially untrue.

  51. 51.

    Comrade Scrutinizer

    @catclub:

    IG Farben did not actually run the ovens and zyklon-B killings, they just profited from it.

    IG Farben had nothing to do with the ovens; that was J.A. Topf und Söhne. Topf was involved in the cremations, and actually helped provide technical support for the gassing operation, telling the camp officials that preheating the air in the gas chambers using waste heat from the ovens would improve the efficiency of Zyklon-B, which worked best at a temperature of 78 degrees.

    While IG Farben held patents for Zyklon-B, the company’s real financial interest in the camps had nothing to do with the gassing. Farben wanted able-bodied slave labor to run its factories, one of which was sited next to Auschwitz for easy access to available slave labor. Farben paid the SS certain amounts for unskilled, skilled, and child labor, and when workers were no longer able to work, they were gassed.

    All in all, it was an example of the healthy cooperation between the job-creators and the government.

  52. 52.

    Roger Moore

    @Sly:

    Ed Gillespie’s “retroactive retirement” spin makes more sense.

    It’s probably the closest to true. My best guess is that Mitt took on reduced duties starting in 1999, but was at least somewhat still involved. They left his name on as head honcho because at that point he intended to come back when the Olympics were over. Then he decided to run for Governor instead of coming back to Bain full time. He used his continuing part-time involvement with Bain to justify residency in Massachusetts, then backdated his retirement to 1999 so he could dodge political fallout for the stuff Bain had been doing while he was there part-time. Finally, he told the story about being completely dissociated from Bain in 1999 on his FEC filing because that was the story he was going to tell for the campaign and he didn’t think anyone would check. It’s a more believable, coherent story than anything he’s putting forward.

  53. 53.

    James E. Powell

    @beltane:

    I really can’t understand why Romney is going out of his way to piss off his Beltway allies.

    Because running against “the liberal media” is Republican Campaigning 101.

  56. 56.

    xian

    @Sly: the #retroactive thing, though, reinforces the etch-a-sketch, do-over, no-risk agreement to run Bain, cautious, rig-the-system, heads-i-win-tails-you-lose arc of Mitt’s silver spoon of a life.

Comments are closed.

Trackbacks