A month ago, I suggested that Countrywide Financial Corp. (NYSE:CFC) could be this year's version of Enron. One reason: Enron's Ken Lay and Countrywide's CEO Angelo Mozilo both publicly boosted their companies' prospects as they dumped their shares.

Today's New York Times [registration required] seconds that motion by reporting that North Carolina's Treasurer, Richard Moore, has asked the SEC to investigate Mozilo's $132 million in stock profits -- which he took as Countrywide traded above $40 -- it's now trading at $18.80 -- right before the subprime mess heated up starting in October 2006.

Moore's letter expressed his anger: "As an investor and a Countrywide shareholder, I was shocked to learn that C.E.O. Angelo Mozilo apparently manipulated his trading plans to cash in, just as the subprime crisis was heating up and Countrywide's fortunes were cooling off." How is this like Enron's Ken Lay? As I posted before, Ken Lay sold about $100 million worth of shares even as he was telling Enron employees what a great investment its shares were.

Will the SEC investigate? Will Mitt Romney keep Mozilo's campaign contribution? Stay tuned for the next episode.

Peter Cohan is President of Peter S. Cohan & Associates, a management consulting and venture capital firm. He also teaches management at Babson College and edits The Cohan Letter. He has no financial interest in Countrywide securities.

More Countrywide Financial news

Douglas McIntyre: Countrywide (CFC) CEO stock sales questioned
Zac Bissonette: Countrywide (CFC) has a new PR campaign, but what about real change?
Eric Buscemi: Countrywide (CFC) showing some class and good business sense
Peter Cohan: Is Countrywide (CFC) too big to fail?
Douglas McIntyre: Could subprime problems hurt search engines?
Peter Cohan: Is Bank of America's (BAC) purchase of Countrywide Financial (CFC) a good bet?
Joseph Lazzaro: The (still) foggy subprime mortgage sector
Peter Cohan: What the mortgage meltdown means to you
Michael Fowlkes: Countrywide Financial (CFC) adds to subprime panic
Peter Cohan: Could Countrywide Financial (CFC) be put down?

Given that George W. Bush, our country's first MBA President, has been an experience most of us would like to forget, is Mitt Romney's background, including co-founder of Bain Capital, something that voters should celebrate?

According to a piece in Portfolio, it isn't: "... does a successful business career equal a good presidency? No. Most presidents have been lawyers, generals, and professional officeholders. Only a few have had big business careers, and this cadre of executives does not exactly inspire confidence. By contrast, the most successful presidents never ran big businesses."

GOP presidential hopeful Mitt Romney probably could have used the help of the big government bureaucrats he often rails against to help him escape the subprime mortgage meltdown, according to TheStreet.com.

Romney is one of the investors in the Goldman Sachs Global Opportunities Fund, the hedge fund that Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (NYSE: GS) and others recently propped up with $3 billion in investments, the site says. Exactly how badly the former Massachusetts governor got burned isn't clear. Like all politicians, his investments are held in a blind trust, and his spokesman told TheStreet.com (where I used to work) that all investment decisions were made without his knowledge.

But the political ironies in this story are numerous.

For one thing, Romney is arguing that he's the type of conservative who believes that government should get the heck out of the way of business so that the free market can sort out everything no matter how painful that may be in the short run.

This type of hands-off approach to regulation encouraged banks to make risky loans to people who couldn't afford them, creating the subprime mortgage mess. You have to wonder whether these guys still think hedge funds shouldn't be regulated.

Of course, any decline in his hedge fund investments isn't going to hurt Romney, reportedly worth about $250 million. Maybe he might give some thought to those who aren't so lucky.

Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney has revealed details about his vast personal fortune. The co-founder of Bain Capital is worth as much as $250 million. According to the Associated Press, "The former venture capitalist's wealth -- reported in a range of $190 million to $250 million -- is spread throughout a dizzying array of investments, that include banks, large investment management firms, foreign export credit corporations and real estate."

Romney's filing the information after two 45-day extensions that he requested, basically because he needed more time to count his money. I'm sure middle America can sympathize.

Romney's wealth and experience saving the Olympics should help him cultivate an image as a decisive leader -- someone who take charge and get things done.

But even his financial dealings are leading to more allegations of flip-flopping for the former Massachusetts Governor. He came under fire for Bain's ties with Iran after he had called for divestment from the region and explained it by saying his position applied to future dealings -- not the past.

DealBook suggests that Mitt Romney's private equity cash is either greater than that of his competitors or not -- depending on which source you cite. But when you see the figure, you'll realize that this issue is besides the point. What really matters is how much money Mitt has extracted from the private equity industry.

I had the memorable experience of partnering with Bain Capital in the 1990s. I worked with two of Mitt's partners there and quite enjoyed traveling on their corporate jet to visit the headquarters of a company that Bain Capital was considering acquiring. His partners were extremely sharp business people.

But with a net worth of at least $250 million, the hundred thousand or so dollars he's raised from private equity firms is a pittance to his campaign. Dealbook said that the Wall Street Journal's numbers -- which put Mitt at the head of the pack -- were totals for the entire 2008 race -- showing him with $156,900. While the PEHub estimates -- which covered only the most recent quarter of donations from the top 11 private equity firms which belong to the Private Equity Council -- put Mitt behind his peers in private equity cash.

Mitt is loaded and the only one who could beat him on that front -- at $5.5 billion -- would be Michael Bloomberg. But he hasn't announced his candidacy -- yet.

Peter Cohan is president of Peter S. Cohan & Associates, a management consulting and venture capital firm. He also teaches management at Babson College and edits The Cohan Letter.

The recent Barron's cover story which anointed Mitt Romney and Bill Richardson as the candidates best suited for investors contained this political propaganda: "Polls show that most Americans consider estate taxes to be unjust."

That statement is misleading.

The latest Gallup poll on the topic from 2000 showed that 53% of people surveyed didn't know enough about the estate tax to have an opinion. Once the issue was explained to them, 60% said they favored eliminating it though only 17% said they would personally benefit from such a move.

Exactly how this was explained isn't clear and a recent Yale University paper argued that people's opposition to the estate tax evaporates once they learn how few people actually pay the tax and the enormous $30 billion to $40 billion hole it would leave in the federal budget if it were repealed.

While the official results of the first money primary won't be posted until April 15th, the unofficial results suggest that Mitt Romney was the Republican winner and Barack Obama topped the Democratic pack. Does this mean that Romney and Obama will win their respective party nominations? Of course not -- but it does reveal some interesting competitive dynamics.

What is the first money primary? It's a media concoction that compares how much money the 2008 candidates raised in the first reporting period ending March 31st. And it determines winners based on two criteria:

• How the candidate did relative to expectations; and
• How much money the candidate actually raised.

So even though Obama, who raised $25 million, brought in $1 million less than Hillary Clinton, he was perceived to have beaten Clinton because she was expected to raise much more than newcomer Obama. Meanwhile Romney -- who lags in the polls behind Rudolph Giuliani and John McCain -- simply raised much more money than his rivals.

This week, we got the tallies on the fundraising for the upcoming presidential election. As expected, the numbers are big. For example, Hillary Clinton raised a cool $26 million in the first quarter.

But there was one apparent surprise; that is, Republican Mitt Romney raised $21 million.

Not bad for someone who doesn't have much name recognition with the American populace.

Then again, he is well-known in the private equity world. You see, back in 1984, Romney founded Bain Capital Partners, LLC. The firm has had big hits -- like Staples Inc. (NASDAQ: SPLS) -- and currently manages $38 billion.

Yes, it's fertile ground for a politician to get big-time contributions. What's more, as private equity firms get bigger, they will realize they need to be more politically savvy.

With his connections, there shouldn't be any shortage of money for Romney and it's a good bet we'll be seeing a lot more of him.

Tom Taulli is the author of various books, including the Complete M&A Handbook and the EDGAR-Online Guide to Decoding Financial Statements.