Romney still at Bain in 2002 (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message

angelikaJ -> Romney still at Bain in 2002 (7/12/2012 8:05:53 AM)

http://bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2012/07/11/government-documents-indicate-mitt-romney-continued-bain-after-date-when-says-left/IpfKYWjnrsel4pvCFbsUTI/story.html

"Government documents filed by Mitt Romney and Bain Capital say Romney remained chief executive and chairman of the firm three years beyond the date he said he ceded control, even creating five new investment partnerships during that time.

Romney has said he left Bain in 1999 to lead the winter Olympics in Salt Lake City, ending his role in the company. But public Securities and Exchange Commission documents filed later by Bain Capital state he remained the firm’s “sole stockholder, chairman of the board, chief executive officer, and president.”

Also, a Massachusetts financial disclosure form Romney filed in 2003 states that he still owned 100 percent of Bain Capital in 2002. And Romney’s state financial disclosure forms indicate he earned at least $100,000 as a Bain “executive” in 2001 and 2002, separate from investment earnings.

The timing of Romney’s departure from Bain is a key point of contention because he has said his resignation in February 1999 meant he was not responsible for Bain Capital companies that went bankrupt or laid off workers after that date."



mnottertail -> RE: Romney still at Bain in 2002 (7/12/2012 8:17:20 AM)

Or dismantled companies, or shipped jobs overseas.....

Oh how the feeble have fallen!!!!!

Jesus, don't the teabaggers and neo-cons and republican goons and thugs know what vetting is?



Moonhead -> RE: Romney still at Bain in 2002 (7/12/2012 8:19:22 AM)

So what's changed?
It isn't like he'll do a mea culpa and admit that he is too responsible for that, is it?



Hillwilliam -> RE: Romney still at Bain in 2002 (7/12/2012 10:58:03 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

Jesus, don't the teabaggers and neo-cons and republican goons and thugs know what vetting is?

You ask that of the party that gave us Palin, Walsh and Bachman?



kalikshama -> RE: Romney still at Bain in 2002 (7/12/2012 11:16:06 AM)

quote:

Walsh


Oh, this guy:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Walsh_%28Illinois_politician%29#Controversies

See also:

Rep. Joe Walsh Blasts Amputee's Service, Says She's Not A 'True Hero'



mnottertail -> RE: Romney still at Bain in 2002 (7/12/2012 11:41:05 AM)

But envision the coming fall slaughter we have been regaled with since the house was elected dumbass.



DarkSteven -> RE: Romney still at Bain in 2002 (7/12/2012 3:38:54 PM)

I have a hard time figuring it out, and the Romney campaign sure isn't being forthcoming. Since he earned a salary as an executive with Bain Capital in 2001 and 2002, it hardly looks like he no longer worked for them.

Romney's statement "In Romney’s 2002 race for governor, he testified before the state Ballot Law Commission that his separation from Bain in 1999 had been a “leave of absence” and not a final departure" might be an explanation. In that case, he would have earned a salary for essentially being on the books as an officer while doing nothing. That sure won't help fight the image of a fat-cat plutocrat who earned fat checks while the workers got canned. But note that a Romney campaign official claimed that "Romney’s signature on some documents after his exit does not indicate active involvement in the firm. " Um, good luck with that one, fella. If he was empowered to enter into legal decisions on the firm's behalf, he's VERY involved.

I have no clue why he would claim to have left Bain's employment while SEC filings and his signature as a Bain officer proved otherwise. Dumbass.



DomKen -> RE: Romney still at Bain in 2002 (7/12/2012 4:24:06 PM)

This could get juicy.

First he certified on federal financial disclosure documents that he left Bain in 1999. If he really didn't he commited a felony by signing those documents.
Second he was only eligible to run for governor of MA in 2002 because he swore under oath that he hadn't really left Bain and his relocation to Utah to run the Olympics was a temporary leave.

So did he commit perjury in MA or did he lie on a federal document?



farglebargle -> RE: Romney still at Bain in 2002 (7/12/2012 6:01:30 PM)

Nine SEC filings submitted by four different business entities after February 1999 that describe Romney as Bain Capital’s boss



mnottertail -> RE: Romney still at Bain in 2002 (7/12/2012 6:04:55 PM)

Hands on or no, he is the responsible officer of his company.

Can you imagine when the shit hits the fan at 3 am and the phone rings in the white house, and Willard says, I left that position in 1999. 



farglebargle -> RE: Romney still at Bain in 2002 (7/12/2012 6:38:01 PM)

Yeah, this is a real issue here. You can't tell the SEC that you're the sole shareholder, CEO, and everything else AND THEN say that there's no active control at the same time. That's the ENTIRE REASON there's SEC filings. So that investors know who to sue.



mnottertail -> RE: Romney still at Bain in 2002 (7/12/2012 6:42:23 PM)

Violation of Sorbanes-Oxley, without question.

Sanity?  If you were embarrassed for America when Obama politely bowed to Asians and Royal figureheads, how you feel about Willard femming up in Attica?

Same? Different?



DesideriScuri -> RE: Romney still at Bain in 2002 (7/12/2012 7:54:05 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail
Or dismantled companies, or shipped jobs overseas.....
Oh how the feeble have fallen!!!!!
Jesus, don't the teabaggers and neo-cons and republican goons and thugs know what vetting is?


LMFAO!!!

Vetting?!?!?!? You are going to question Republicans about vetting?!?!?!?

You, are too damn much sometimes!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hzMas1bVidw

To comment on the article, though....this could be very, very bad for Romney. Hopefully, he has a legit response and this gets tossed out with yesterday's garbage, or he gets nailed and suffers the proper legal consequences of his lies. Maybe we can get a better Conservative as a nominee....



mnottertail -> RE: Romney still at Bain in 2002 (7/12/2012 8:01:23 PM)

Actually, he has done nothing illegal whatsoever in this matter (that is visible at this point anyhow).  But he has to fess up to the lies.  

The predicament bondage position he is in is fucked if he does and fucked if he dont.

No, I was not:  SEC filings investigation, IRS investigations, over false SEC filings (threatened and blasted over the talking heads shows like the Holder shit).  Bad Bad Gamboo even if it never comes off, he has this lump of shit in his court, front and center, and at his age, he shits his diapers, hes gonna sit in it for a long fuckin time. 

Yes, I was.   Then you lying fucker shipped jobs overseas and dismantled companies.




DarkSteven -> RE: Romney still at Bain in 2002 (7/12/2012 8:28:07 PM)

Ron, you're only addressing this from a legal POV. The political one is at least as important. Both Romney and Obama have been slinging mud at each other. The Bain Capital stuff is the only thing that's stuck thus far. As long as Bain Capital is the topic of discussion, Obama wins. This mess will keep Bain front and center for a while, which not only helps Obama directly, but it also pushes the economy off the radar.

Romney has no choice. He needs to respond quickly and forcefully to this. So far, his response is grudging and appears to be hiding something.



mnottertail -> RE: Romney still at Bain in 2002 (7/12/2012 8:35:53 PM)

But this is a political forum and I thought this would be a tautology, even the knuckledraggers understand this and are nowhere around spouting their usual line of patented asswipe.  (they await the rushfelch to know how to proceed here)

The beauty is, although he has to respond quickly and forcefully, he is shit out of luck, because he says yes I was, then it is about lies and the economy (in that his track record of dismantling companies and shipping jobs overseas is written in stone)

If he says no, then his lie is also teased out to such things as his lack of concern for the constitution, his better than the people attitude and the 47th lackluster jobs performance is nailed to his forehead, because if he left then, nothing accrues to Staples or any of his other success stories past that date.  There will be rattling of sabers about SEC violations, and funky IRS shit (even more than now....) and concerns about transparency and so on...

Either way it is the economy and his abysmal failure. And either way, Willard Mitt Romney lied to the american people.

Hes fucking cooked pretty bad here. Best he can do that I can see is explain it to the teabots and thats about as big a crowd as hes gonna get.

Even Cheney is coaching him in the I dont recall defense now, I bet. 



erieangel -> RE: Romney still at Bain in 2002 (7/12/2012 9:09:01 PM)

The problem with this whole thing is the right wing just doesn't care what Mitt has done in his past. Their hatred for Obama is so strong, they'd give the presidency to Manson if they could.



farglebargle -> RE: Romney still at Bain in 2002 (7/13/2012 1:38:15 AM)

I think the real thing is that the Right Wing can't win anything with just the crazy religious nuts and the crazy teapartiers. They NEED a sizeable amount of 'moderates' to 'win'.

And when the narrative is: This guy made millions by firing Americans and moving jobs overseas, and when asked directly about it, LIED in such a pathetic way that there's like FOUR YEARS of SEC filings to prove his claims false. OR they prove he lied on like 4 years of SEC filings. Either way, Romney's LYING about his involvement in firing Americans and moving their jobs overseas -- and making enough money doing it to try and BUY THE WHITE HOUSE.

Heck of a narrative. The guy who came up with it deserves a raise.



Moonhead -> RE: Romney still at Bain in 2002 (7/13/2012 4:35:30 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

Actually, he has done nothing illegal whatsoever in this matter (that is visible at this point anyhow). 

Neither did Clinton (getting his cock sucked), and look at the fuss there was over that. I suspect a few of the neocon massive in here would be demanding his immediate trial and the seizing of all his assets as the instrumentality of a crime if Pisspants was a Democrat, yet all we're hearing is silence aside the odd half muttered denial.
Looks suspiciously like a double standard to me...



thishereboi -> RE: Romney still at Bain in 2002 (7/13/2012 5:08:25 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: erieangel

The problem with this whole thing is the right wing just doesn't care what Mitt has done in his past. Their hatred for Obama is so strong, they'd give the presidency to Manson if they could.




And in the last election Manson would have been given the nod by the left as long as he had a D next to his name. Anyone was better than another repub in office. So what's your point?



Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875