Political Forums - 1999 or 2002?

Political Forums (http://www.politicalchat.org/index.php)

- Current events (http://www.politicalchat.org/forumdisplay.php?f=26)

- - 1999 or 2002? (http://www.politicalchat.org/showthread.php?t=4298)

This is some real stuff going on here. Either he committed a felony or it is just another one of his lies.

Quote:

Earlier this month, FactCheck.org stated that if Mitt Romney had not left Bain Capital in 1999, he "would be guilty of a federal felony by certifying on federal financial disclosure forms that he left active management of Bain Capital in February 1999."

FactCheck.org made that argument to dismiss complaints by President Barack Obama's campaign, but a new Boston Globe report on Romney's true tenure at Bain Capital — which reportedly lasted until 2002, three years longer than Romney has stated — brings FactCheck.org's statement into sharp relief.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/...ny-128733.html

Quote:

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.

http://www.boston.com/news/politics/..._says_he_left/

Looks more like a felony to me.

Carl

Jeez that was ten years ago. He has been running for President ever since and just forgot the dates involved.

Or more likely figured his electorate does not care in the least bit about the truth.

Barney

You seem to be confusing patriotism for criminal behavior.;)

Just saying any investigation and or prosecution would be seen by the Right as just a attempt to tar his image. No real issue seen as important by them. They will see nothing wrong with his lying or intentionally forgetting info on official papers. Just like when on a 1040 tax forms or resumes seem to be given passes. Because it is the Government after all and with a strong mistrust associated given to them.

This could lead to Romney to being positively tied to outsourcing jobs overseas so will be vigorously denied.

Barney

Quote:

Originally Posted by CarlV (Post 112117)

This is some real stuff going on here. Either he committed a felony or it is just another one of his lies.

He did leave active involvement in 1999. I don't see a smoking gun here despite the yearnings of the democratic attack dog Cutter. The unwinding of a business relationship takes time when it is as complicated as that of Romney and Bain Caiptal. Political hacks surely can't think that Romney's financial matters are as simple as an average household and that somehow it is sinister that Romney's is complicated, however, the paid hacks can find it politically useful.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bhunter (Post 112166)

Registered and paid as the CEO for three years after 1999 and attended board meeting during that time. If it looks like a duck.......

Barney

Signing SEC documents stating you were the CEO after 1999? Come on now you just don't sign documents like that pro forma. He declared a salary of $100,000 but I guess he could forget such a piddling (to him ) amount...

I think he is imploding. I would not be surprised if they decide to not give him the nomination at the convention in August. I also think he will have a hard time finding someone as running mate. Condoleezza Rice? Are they serious?

I read the Factcheck article, too. Not exactly the last word in my book. In fact I'm finding it harder and harder to believe any byline from AP and the others. Too much credence is given to the concept of false equivalence by these big news outlets. It's kinda hard to wade through the outright bullshit and the 'just the surrender of the facts to whomever threatens the bottom line of these newscorps.' Which is where the false equivalence is coming into play. They are threading the tightrope between the two forces affecting them. On one side is whether they actually report facts in depth and on the other is the profitability of the news company. It makes for milquetoast reportage at best or false equivalence at it's worst. I sure wonder where the Murrows and Cronkites of the present age are?
Probably hiding out in a bunker somewhere tropical clipping coupons & sipping Mai Tais..:(

Just saying that it takes time to unwind it doesn't account for the $100k a year he received as salary for a portion of those years. It smacks of trying to politically distance his involvement in the outsourcing scandal because these latest attack adverts are playing so well to the blue collar swing states. Who really knows but Mitts name was on the masthead during this time. If you want to believe a flip flopper like Mitt that's your perogative but to characterize it as a simple witch hunt belies the fact that he's listed as sole proprietor until 2001-2.

Quote:

Originally Posted by icenine (Post 112172)

Condi's reaction to that question was kind of funny. It looked like she just bit down on a bitter dill pickle and was in need of a good chiropractor she was shaking her head so hard. I would be very surprised if she did join the ticket.

Even though I find Romney smarmy, I don't think this story has any legs.