Skip to main content
Message Font: Serif | Sans-Serif
No. of Recommendations: 38
Well, God bless Senator Kyl (R-AZ), who asked Geithner the question I wanted asked:

"The question is whether it occurred to you before you were nominated or approached to be nominated that, in point of fact, you didn't have to go beyond 2003 and '04 because of the statute of limitations," Kyl said.

Geithner said: "I did not believe I had the obligation to go back. . . . I had no occasion to think about it, and I might not have thought about it had I not gone through the vetting process."

Either he was flat-out lying or he lacks the intellectual curiousity to be fit for the job. Read the whole article and you'll also be treated to his explanation that he didn't closely review the return he prepared himself and the incredible FU hubris of saying that it really doesn't matter because of the economic crisis.

The man isn't fit for the job, and he's mistaken in thinking he's the only one who could do it.

Print the post  


In accordance with IRS Circular 230, you cannot use the contents of any post on The Motley Fool's message boards to avoid tax-related penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or applicable state or local tax law provisions.
What was Your Dumbest Investment?
Share it with us -- and learn from others' stories of flubs.
When Life Gives You Lemons
We all have had hardships and made poor decisions. The important thing is how we respond and grow. Read the story of a Fool who started from nothing, and looks to gain everything.
Contact Us
Contact Customer Service and other Fool departments here.
Work for Fools?
Winner of the Washingtonian great places to work, and Glassdoor #1 Company to Work For 2015! Have access to all of TMF's online and email products for FREE, and be paid for your contributions to TMF! Click the link and start your Fool career.