Quote:
Originally Posted by jt800
Saying someone committed a felony without ANY proof is slander.
PS: Why did she have to backpedal if it was perfectly OK?
|
She didn't say that he committed a felony.
She referenced the
Boston Globe report that SEC fillings showed Mitt Romney as being the CEO of Bain past 1999 and that a Massachusetts financial disclosure form Romney filed in 2003 states that he still owned 100 percent of Bain Capital in 2002. On top of that 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.
It is also public record that Romney has stated he retired from Bain in 1999, so the fact remains.
One of two things happened:
1) Mitt Romney retired in 1999
This would mean that the SEC fillings and all of the other forms that Romney filled that state he had not retired are false and therefore could be used in court to show a felony was committed.
OR
2) Mitt Romney did not retire in 1999
This would mean he lied to the general public and no felony would be committed.
So, she didn't say he committed a felony, she said if he lied on his fillings then he committed a felony (Which is in fact true). So if he did retire as he stated to the American public, then there actually is substantial evidence showing he committed a felony. This alone makes me believe that option 2 is the one that actually happened because SEC fillings are usually fairly heavily looked into when brought into question. Since Romney hasn't been charged, I'd have to say that odds are he was officially working for Bain past 1999.
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.
