Mitt Romney’s core argument for supporting his candidacy for president is the assertion that his business experience has prepared him to deal with the economic challenges that the country faces. But that case is muddled by the many unanswered questions about his past that he refuses to reveal. Unlike his father, who released twelve years of tax returns in his White House bid, Mitt Romney has released tax filings for only one year. Then he expects everyone to take at face value his insistence that he has never sheltered income off-shore and has always followed the law. OK, fine, then why not release the documents to prove it?

The problem with taking Romney’s word for anything is his proclivity for telling lies about almost any subject he discusses. With regard to his tenure at Bain Capital, Romney has declared emphatically that he was not responsible for any of the reported instances of terminating domestic employees and sending those jobs overseas. His principle claim is that he left Bain in 1999, before any such actions occurred.

However, new evidence has emerged showing that this is just another false statement from Romney. Documents filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission show that Romney was identifying himself as the Managing Directer of Bain as late as 2001.

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, DC 20549
SCHEDULE 13D
February 11, 2001

Bain Capital, Inc., a Delaware corporation (“Bain Capital”), is the sole managing partner of the BCIP entities. Mr. W. Mitt Romney is the sole shareholder, sole director, Chief Executive Officer and President of Bain Capital and thus is the controlling person of Bain Capital.

Romney has said that, despite what official filings may say, he could not have been running Bain at the time because he was too busy working on the 2002 Olympics. If that’s true, then he lied to the SEC when he signed the Schedule 13D cited above. So Romney is either lying on an official government form, or he is lying to the American people. That’s not a choice that has any positive outcomes.

Another example of Romney’s blatant disregard for the truth is his claim that any off-shore investments in his name were made in blind trusts without his knowledge. Just yesterday he told an Iowa radio show that “I don’t manage them. […] I don’t even know where they are.” But records reveal that he did, in fact, own off-shore assets in 1997, prior to having created his blind trust. And furthermore, despite his denial, he knew of other such investments that were reported in the one tax return he released for 2010.

All of these incidents illustrate that Romney has no shame when it comes to lying about his past, even when those lies can be exposed with information from public records. It makes one wonder what is in the tax returns that he is so feverishly struggling to keep from becoming public. How much worse can it get?

In the wake of these controversies, the response of the Romney campaign appears to be a rather childish “I know you are, but what am I” approach. His operatives are now saying that they plan to go on TV and call President Obama a liar. That’s the sort of projection that is typical of the tactics employed by Romney surrogate, SuperPAC kingpin, and Fox News contributor, Karl Rove. But it’s a dangerous strategy for someone who’s veracity is already so tarnished.