FACT CHECK: Romney met Bain partners after exit

[Synthaholic]

Reading comprehension is essential.

It sure is!

Even as he disengaged.

You really need practice at it.

Let Me summarize it for you.


Romney was NOT running Bain Capital during that time.

Got it yet?

He was CEO, President, and sole stockholder.

He was responsible. Period.

Got it yet?

 

[Charles_Main]

FACT CHECK: Romney met Bain partners after exit



WASHINGTON (AP) -- Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney has said he had no active role in Bain Capital, the private equity firm he founded, after he exited in February 1999 to take over Salt Lake City's Winter Olympics bid. But according to Bain associates and others familiar with Romney's actions at the time, he stayed in regular contact with his partners over the following months, tending to his partnership interests and negotiating his separation from the company.

Those familiar with Romney's discussions with his Bain partners said the contacts included several meetings in Boston, the company's home base, but were limited to matters that did not affect the firm's investments or other management decisions. Yet Romney continued to oversee his partnership stakes even as he disengaged from the firm, personally signing or approving a series of corporate and legal documents through the spring of 2001, according to financial reports reviewed by The Associated Press.

The details of Romney's contacts with his Bain partners between his 1999 departure and his separation from the company in mid-2001 could show how involved he was - either as CEO or passive investor - in several multimillion-dollar investment deals, bankruptcies and a spate of layoffs and overseas job shifts at Bain-owned companies that reportedly occurred during that span. Romney's role became a campaign issue in recent weeks because corporate records from the time showed his interests in some of those deals - despite his insistence that he gave up any decision-making authority once he left Bain.


*snip*

Romney met with the People running the Company he no longer ran but still owned a huge stake in?

Wow shocker, Must be a criminal.

 

[Charles_Main]

It sure is!

Even as he disengaged.

You really need practice at it.

Let Me summarize it for you.


Romney was NOT running Bain Capital during that time.

Got it yet?

He was CEO, President, and sole stockholder.

He was responsible. Period.

Got it yet?

Only you and your side Claims he was CEO at the time.

 

[Sallow]

no one would know unless he was indicted, and if he was indicted, no one would care.

are you sure you live in a city? in america? in the 21st century?

They wouldn't KNOW?



Emu, please.

sorry, didn't mean to interrupt your outrage.

carry on

Not outraged..

Hungry.

Get in mah belly!

 

[Charles_Main]

They wouldn't KNOW?



Emu, please.

sorry, didn't mean to interrupt your outrage.

carry on

Not outraged..

Hungry.

Get in mah belly!

LOL

Look at his enormous head!!

 

[Sallow]

Even as he disengaged.

You really need practice at it.

Let Me summarize it for you.


Romney was NOT running Bain Capital during that time.

Got it yet?

He was CEO, President, and sole stockholder.

He was responsible. Period.

Got it yet?

Only you and your side Claims he was CEO at the time.

So did Romney.

When he signed documentation for the SEC declaring he was CEO, President, and sole stockholder.

 

[Synthaholic]

He was CEO, President, and sole stockholder.

He was responsible. Period.

Got it yet?

Only you and your side Claims he was CEO at the time.

So did Romney.

When he signed documentation for the SEC declaring he was CEO, President, and sole stockholder.

Wingnuts don't do facts.

 

[Trajan]

Which may be why he is desperate not to release more tax returns.

whatever.....we already know he received 100K a year form Bain while he was on leave etc..what do you SUPPOSE a tax return would tell us, well you..?

I do not know, but financial columnists from Bloomberg and the WSJ have speculated that his returns could shed a light on his post-1999 Bain dealings.

"speculation", "could", proof? zip. just what ifs.... so F&F is a 'fishing expedition' but this isn't?


anyway, a little closer to home a snippet as to how ridiculous this all can get; I remember a great deal of speculation ridiculed by the press too, ala Clintons returns while gov. in Arkansas, which revealed pardon the pun a $2 deduction for underwear he had donated to charity, its was a late night comedy staple and used to denigrate Clinton by politicos...thats all this is about, ......


its a win win, if there is NO proof any Bain issues, there is sure to be something that will be made into an axe to wield no matter how ridiculous. McCain released 2 years, I see no reason for Romney to go back any further either, YOUR speculation not withstanding.

Unlike wingnuts, I defer to experts in their fields.

you apparently have a comprehension issue. they speculate that IF there is ANY issues, they may, may be found in his tax returns, they have not accused Romney of engaging in any illegal activity. see how that works?

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

REALITY CHECK: Nobody fucking cares.

 

[Sallow]

whatever.....we already know he received 100K a year form Bain while he was on leave etc..what do you SUPPOSE a tax return would tell us, well you..?

I do not know, but financial columnists from Bloomberg and the WSJ have speculated that his returns could shed a light on his post-1999 Bain dealings.

"speculation", "could", proof? zip. just what ifs.... so F&F is a 'fishing expedition' but this isn't?


anyway, a little closer to home a snippet as to how ridiculous this all can get; I remember a great deal of speculation ridiculed by the press too, ala Clintons returns while gov. in Arkansas, which revealed pardon the pun a $2 deduction for underwear he had donated to charity, its was a late night comedy staple and used to denigrate Clinton by politicos...thats all this is about, ......


its a win win, if there is NO proof any Bain issues, there is sure to be something that will be made into an axe to wield no matter how ridiculous. McCain released 2 years, I see no reason for Romney to go back any further either, YOUR speculation not withstanding.

Unlike wingnuts, I defer to experts in their fields.

you apparently have a comprehension issue. they speculate that IF there is ANY issues, they may, may be found in his tax returns, they have not accused Romney of engaging in any illegal activity. see how that works?

First off, WhiteWater was basically over and done with in Arkansas..until the conservatives wanted to use it as a method to unseat a popularly elected President..and with pretty good success. They were able to do a fishing trip that uncovered ::gasp:: an affair. Which is always a good reason for impeachment. Hopefully Republicans remember with their own.

Secondly..the whole McCain thing is pretty dishonest. He released his tax returns every year he was in the Senate.

 

[Jarhead]

REALITY CHECK: Nobody fucking cares.

The only ones that care are those that wouldnt vote for him anyway.

I have to laugh at how much they are wrapped up in a candidate they have no interest in.

 

[Trajan]

I do not know, but financial columnists from Bloomberg and the WSJ have speculated that his returns could shed a light on his post-1999 Bain dealings.

"speculation", "could", proof? zip. just what ifs.... so F&F is a 'fishing expedition' but this isn't?


anyway, a little closer to home a snippet as to how ridiculous this all can get; I remember a great deal of speculation ridiculed by the press too, ala Clintons returns while gov. in Arkansas, which revealed pardon the pun a $2 deduction for underwear he had donated to charity, its was a late night comedy staple and used to denigrate Clinton by politicos...thats all this is about, ......


its a win win, if there is NO proof any Bain issues, there is sure to be something that will be made into an axe to wield no matter how ridiculous. McCain released 2 years, I see no reason for Romney to go back any further either, YOUR speculation not withstanding.

Unlike wingnuts, I defer to experts in their fields.

you apparently have a comprehension issue. they speculate that IF there is ANY issues, they may, may be found in his tax returns, they have not accused Romney of engaging in any illegal activity. see how that works?

First off, WhiteWater was basically over and done with in Arkansas..until the conservatives wanted to use it as a method to unseat a popularly elected President..and with pretty good success. They were able to do a fishing trip that uncovered ::gasp:: an affair. Which is always a good reason for impeachment. Hopefully Republicans remember with their own.

Secondly..the whole McCain thing is pretty dishonest. He released his tax returns every year he was in the Senate.

firstly, can you link to that please? because I cannot seem to locate a link saying he released all of his returns as senator or candidate, and this from a source you will appreciate;

FactCheck.org : Romney and the Tax Return Precedent


and, disclosure which is what Mccain did is NOT the same as releasing tax returns-

Most Congress members keep tax returns secret
• Not just Romney, but hundreds of lawmakers from both parties refuse to release records

ust 17 out of the 535 members of Congress released their most recent tax forms or provided some similar documentation of their tax liabilities in response to requests from McClatchy Newspapers over the last three months. Another 19 replied that they wouldn’t release the information, and the remainder never responded to the query.

Most Congress members keep tax returns secret; • Not just Romney, but hundreds of lawmakers from both parties refuse to release records | | The Bulletin



secondly, your blurb on whitewater means what? oh that is was all political, well thank you Mr. Information, I made that point hello.


thirdly- there is NO standard....so to make that an issue is dishonest-