http://hotair.com/archives/2012/07/11/pelosi-made-up-to-5-million-by-offshoring/

by Ed Morrissey



I could have added this Matt Lewis find to my earlier
post, but this deserves its own thread for a couple of reasons. One, it’s
much more on point than comparisons to Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Valerie
Jarrett. Two, it’s yet another reminder of the bad decision made by House
Democrats after their 2010 midterm debacle:

On the heels of The Weekly Standard’s report yesterday that DNC chair Debbie
Wasserman Schultz — a vocal critic of Mitt Romney‘s
investing practices, had herself dabbled in the foreign markets — we can
add Nancy Pelosi to the list of prominent Democrats to profit
from overseas investments.
According to Pelosi’s 2011 financial disclosure statement, the Democratic House Minority
Leader received between $1 million and $5 million in partnership income
from ”Matthews International Capital Management LLC,” a group that emphasizes
that it has a “A Singular Focus on Investing in Asia.” A quick
trip to the company website reveals a featured post extolling the virtues of
outsourcing. …
Pelosi is also a small investor in the embattled “Moduslink Global,” one of
the “outsourcing pioneers” that Mitt Romney has been criticized for associating
with while at Bain Capital.
And thus does the “outsourcing” meme implode. This doesn’t involve an
indirect investment by a retirement account, nor an ambiguous line of credit.
Pelosi’s investment in offshoring is direct, substantial, purposeful — and
profitable. It also shows that the leader of Congressional Democrats followed
Romney’s own investment pattern, which makes it very, very difficult for Obama
to demonize Romney’s investments.
As Matt notes, there is nothing wrong with investing overseas. People should
put their money where they find a good return and an ethical application of
business principles. For the House Minority Leader, that ethical application
includes supporting jobs overseas — and that’s a defendable, rational choice for
private business transactions, just as it was and is for Mitt Romney. Now, when
it comes to public funds derived from a program that was sold as a
means of “saving and creating” jobs here in America, well, that’s a different
kettle of fish altogether. Like I said earlier, that’s a debate that the GOP
will welcome.