Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It seems fairly clear that Romney did not have a significant managing role to play in Bain after 1999 based on the recollections of former Bain people. Let's credit them with being correct.
BUT - IF they are correct, the there are lots of SEC Documents filed that are False. And sworn testimony. And Financial filings with the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. These all show Romney to have been a managing partner/sole owner/ sole director, etc. of Bain into 2002. OOPS. Typo? Two Typos? Three Typos? Lawyer Misspoke?
Unlikely. Having filed/been signatory to many SEC documents over the years, I can tell you that several layers of review go into those documents before filing them. Many people are given the opportunity to catch errors.
So then which is correct? The sworn filings & testimony given back in 2002, or recollections made over ten years later?
They cannot BOTH be correct.
As someone posted earlier, SO WHAT if Romney did or did not run Bain during those years. That in & of itself doesn't matter. Big deal. It was a private company so they could do as they pleased within the bounds of the law. But what does matter is the filing of potentially false & misleading documents, if they are so.
Mitt just does not want to own up to some practices that were either done by him, or in his name. Not much more complicated than that. It's RW aversion to acknowledging responsibility for not so good things.
It seems fairly clear that Romney did not have a significant managing role to play in Bain after 1999 based on the recollections of former Bain people. Let's credit them with being correct.
BUT - IF they are correct, the there are lots of SEC Documents filed that are False. And sworn testimony. And Financial filings with the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. These all show Romney to have been a managing partner/sole owner/ sole director, etc. of Bain into 2002. OOPS. Typo? Two Typos? Three Typos? Lawyer Misspoke?
Unlikely. Having filed/been signatory to many SEC documents over the years, I can tell you that several layers of review go into those documents before filing them. Many people are given the opportunity to catch errors.
So then which is correct? The sworn filings & testimony given back in 2002, or recollections made over ten years later?
They cannot BOTH be correct.
As someone posted earlier, SO WHAT if Romney did or did not run Bain during those years. That in & of itself doesn't matter. Big deal. It was a private company so they could do as they pleased within the bounds of the law. But what does matter is the filing of potentially false & misleading documents, if they are so.
Did He or Didn't He?
Excellent post. I don't give a crap if he did or did not do something - that doesn't matter. But Romney is saying something now that seems to be in direct conflict with official documents. If Romney is saying "A" now, and documents/testimony said "B" back then, it seems to be there are two basic and fundamentally opposing possibilities ... either the sworn testimony and documents are correct and Romney is lying now, or Romney is telling the truth now and the sworn testimony and documents are lies. I just don't see how both can be true.
Of course you are not interested in the truth. You lie when you claim he worked for Bain Capital after 1999. You present evidence of the fact that he worked after 1999. - as evidence that,that work was for Bain Capital when it has been repeatedly proven he wasn't.
Look you are a Bainer. No amount of evidence can persuade you .
Interesting tidbit just convinced me there is merit to all this. Looking at the 2003 disclosure form Mittens filed as he became governor there were dozens of organizations that Mittens held office, each was listed in the forms. The interesting aspect is that several of those Bain Capital organizations, that clearly listed Mittens as the 100% go to person, were created after Feb 1999 and before he became governor. If you're not actively involved in running Bain how are you creating NEW Bain Capital holding companies in your name?
Quote:
Government documents say former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney remained chief executive and chairman of Bain Capital three years beyond the date he said he ceded control, even creating five new investment partnerships during that time.
Lol, debunked several times, when CNN and Politifact called Obamama a liar.
I admire you pluck and the opportunity to remind everyone, that even the MSM is now calling Obama a liar, not good.
No, not debunked. Not everyone knew everything going on at Bain. The sec should have been notified that Romney no longer played an active role, and that did not happen.
What's wrong with asking, even Obama supporters at vain and calling that "debunked "? Its their job to help bain.
Only way to truly know, is to release his tax returns. There was a reason McCain didn't pick Romney.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
