Keeling Kasich Bonus Post 1

Except that the tax return (Kasich only provide access to reporters, for 15 minutes, denied any copying and only permitted notetaking) showed that Kasich actually did receive a bonus that essentially tripled his annual salary the same year Lehman Bros. went into bankruptcy.

So, then Keeling pivots to:

Keeling Kasich Bonus Post 2

With over $500k in compensation (most of it in “bonuses”) from a “bankrupt” company, who needed a golden parachute?

A “golden parachute” is normally a contractual agreement to prevent an executive from making the company subject to a hostile takeover by manipulating the company’s stock price by selling its shares, etc.

There was never any allegation that Kasich received a “golden parachute” as that is a term that commonly used in a situation in which an executive was terminated by the company, not when the company ceased to exists.

So Keeling is now reduced to touting that this single tax record disproves something nobody has alleged.? Nobody said Kasich benefited from a contractual golden parachute agreement, but that he benfitted financially while the company collapsed.? Again, the fact that he earned roughly three times his salary thanks to bonuses while the company was collapses is CONFIRMED by this disclosure.

In fact, the DDN report Keeling cited actually shows what a farce Kasich’s transparency was:

Kasich?s campaign permitted reporters to see but not photocopy a summary of Kasich?s 2008 income tax return and portions of the actual return.

How’s that for transparency?? A summary and “portions” of the actual return, for only one year.

During the 2006 contest, both Blackwell and Strickland was far more transparent, releasing entire copies of their returns for multiple years (six years worth, in fact).

What is Kasich hiding?

Tagged with:
  • The other thing you need to think about when reading these numbers is that this is the only year he decided to release his tax returns. This one was cherry-picked for a reason. And knowing that we can only assume that the other years saw Kasich receiving much bigger bonuses. More money from Fox as well. Though I think his $51 in book royalties probably stayed about the same.

  • john_edwards

    Who gives a rip?

    This class warfare crap has to stop. Just because a guy made some money that automatically makes him bad? Well, by that logic – only people earning under $40,000 per year are suited for office? [so maybe you should run for something?]

    Or – How about Michelle Obama sucking hundreds of thousands off a hospital – after getting a cush board spot after her husband became senator? Or how about Chris Dodd's sweet mortgage deal? Or any of Charlie Rangel's finances? I don't hear your crazy conspiracy theories about these actual incidents.

    The distinction between Kasich and the people listed above is that Kasich was purely in the private sector when he was making his money. The others used the power of their office to attain all their goodies.

    Your days of demonizing people for being prosperous will soon come to an end.

  • modernesquire


    The guy made over half a million dollars, mostly in bonuses, from a company in bankruptcy. And yet, claims he didn't make money as Lehman went down. This isn't about class warfare, though.

    And if you believe that John Kasich got that job totally unrelated to him being in Congress, then you're not worth the time to discuss.

    Chris Dodd was forced into retirement over it. Charlie Rangel has lost his gavel to Ways and Means. What's your point other than to engage in the faux outrage of false equivalences?

Looking for something?

Use the form below to search the site:

Still not finding what you're looking for? Drop a comment on a post or contact us so we can take care of it!