Debbie Wasserman Schultz condemns Romney for his Swiss Bank accounts, but fails to mention her own.
KCurtis
2012/07/11 12:03:28
After spending days pounding on presumptive GOP nominee Mitt Romney for having a Swiss bank account, disclosure forms show that DNC boss Debbie Wasserman Schultz also had funds in a Swiss bank account at one time. The Weekly Standard reported Tuesday that the Florida Democrat also had investments in foreign drug companies and the state bank of India.
"This revelation comes mere days after the Democratic chair attacked
presumptive Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney for holding
money in Swiss bank accounts in the past," Daniel Halper wrote at the
Weekly Standard.
A report at Twitchy says that Wasserman Schultz "tweeted attacks on (Mitt Romney's) 'secret offshore' accounts, slammed his 'secretive investments' on Fox News Sunday," and, Twitchy added, joined Rep. Donna Edwards in "pushing the failed Democrat hashtag #WheresYourBank" on Monday night.
"Americans need to ask themselves, why does an American businessman
need a Swiss bank account and secretive investments like that?"
Wasserman Schultz asked on Sunday.
"Just something, a thought, that I'd like to leave folks with," she added.
"By her own standards, that makes Little Debbie out of touch and secretive, doesn’t it?" Twitchy asked.
Read More: http://www.examiner.com/article/hypocrisy-dnc-chai...
By the way, does she wash her hair with mayonnaise?
(There's Something About Mary)
Wasserman Schultz has "offshore accounts" through the contributions she made to a 401k retirement account. The investments made be the managing firm were mingled with other investors 401k funds and ultimately included purchases of the stock of several Swiss firms,among other domestic stocks. Such investments are included in the annual statements of the managing firm. Given this criteria nearly every person in The U.S. that contributes to a retirement fund or buys insurance has an investment in 'foreign accounts.
Mitt Romney, on the other hand, made his investments (i.e. deposits) directly into accounts that were set up to handle offshore any deposits he made into those accounts.
These accounts were made at his discretion and for his personal benefit.
This in itself is not necessarily illegal or even unethical. If these accounts were made to avoid a U.S. tax liability then they are both illegal and unethical.
It remains to be seen how the spin on this situation will develop.
Given his reputation as a corporate raider and a ruthless capitalist he will have a hard time avoiding a public predisposition of inferred guilt.
Politically, why tell the whole truth when half the truth will do?