Romney's Bain Lie

[Si modo]

Hmmm can you post that link to his tax return from 2011 again...it might actually. Because if he was CEO that would be a salaried position...if he was out of Bain, then it would be just capital gains right?

We could end it right there if only we had his tax return from those years.

2010 tax return.

Filed 10.15.10, as usual with those who need extensions.

Nothing about Bain.

So, you think he went back to Bain?

That isn't the year in question.

He should release the returns from 1999 -2002.

That's the year the poster asked for.

Why do you want those other returns?

 

[Trajan]

Documents: Romney didn't manage Bain funds
By Dan Primack July 12, 2012: 2:41 PM ET

snip-

Bain Capital began circulating offering documents for its seventh private equity fund in June 2000. Those documents include several pages specifying fund management. The section begins:

Set forth below is information regarding the background of the senior private equity investment professionals of Bain Capital. Also listed are certain investment professionals responsible for the day-to-day affairs of the Brookside and Sankaty funds, which are affiliated funds of Fund VII.

It then goes on to list 18 managers of the private equity fund. Mitt Romney is not among them. Same goes for an affiliated co-investment fund, whose private placement memorandum is dated September 2000.

Then there is Bain Capital Venture Fund -- the firm's first dedicated venture capital effort -- whose private placement memorandum is dated January 2001. Romney also isn't listed among its "key investment professionals," or as part of its day-to-day operations or investment committee.

All of this could prove problematic for the Obama campaign, which has spent they day crowing over the Globe story (going so far as to hold a media call about it).

"When Mitt Romney ran for governor and now as he's running for president, he consistently claimed he could not be blamed for bankruptcies and layoffs from Bain investments after February 1999 because he departed for the Olympics," said Obama spokeswoman Stephanie Cutter, according to the Globe. "Now, we know that he wasn't telling the truth."

But the contemporaneous Bain documents show that Romney was indeed telling the truth about no longer having operational input at Bain -- which, one should note, is different from no longer having legal or financial ties to the firm.

more at-

Documents: Romney didn't manage Bain funds - The Term Sheet: Fortune's deals blog Term Sheet

 

[Sallow]

well, as I said a few times now, some of those folks are obama donors....so why are they protecting Romney?

and I think I am not stretching things here if I note that the SEC now, looking at that statement would most certainly check it out and see if there is any flim flam, you do understand that changing something as complex as that is not done in a day or even 6 months....why these people would stick their neck out does not make sense.....


plus with the admin making statements like this, it is incumbent upon them to make their case, vapor doesn't count. If they have it fine, lets see it and the chips will fall where they will...


oh hey, didn't you work on wall st? I guess that makes you a liar too eh? where were you and what did you know and when?

First off..Romney said he left in 1999. But he said in the debates..he worked with Bain for 25 years. Well Bain was started in 1977. 1977 + 25..puts you where? Oh yeah, 2002.

Second..he was drawing a salary of 100K..outside of his investments from Bain. For what? Executive.

Third..Bain..themselves..identified Romney as an executive on part time absence leave.

And yeah..I worked on Wall Street..in Information Technology. I didn't do trading.

and??????

You brought this stuff up.

Gosh.

 

[Trajan]

For Romney to be truly off the hook politically for the stuff Bain was doing, he’d have to claim not lack of control, but lack of knowledge. And that’s just not going to wash with anyone. He could try going the “I didn’t have even the slightest idea what the company I technically still owned was doing” route, but he’d be marking himself as either dishonest or incompetent.

And yet that’s really his only out. Just a guess, but if, hypothetically speaking, he’d learned during the 1999-2002 stretch that Bain had made a practice of poisoning the water supply in a Midwestern factory town, he’d have severed all ties, legal and otherwise, with the company.

But that didn’t happen. More likely, Bain went on doing what it had always done, and with Romney’s tacit stamp of approval. So he owns it.

^^^^^

That.


Cutting Through The Bain Bamboozlement | TPM Editors Blog

For Romney to be truly off the hook politically for the stuff Bain was doing, he’d have to claim not lack of control, but lack of knowledge.

garbage.....

 

[Vidi]

2010 tax return.

Filed 10.15.10, as usual with those who need extensions.

Nothing about Bain.

So, you think he went back to Bain?

That isn't the year in question.

He should release the returns from 1999 -2002.

That's the year the poster asked for.

Why do you want those other returns?

I asked for that one because its the ONLY one Romney has thus far released.

I wanted to look at the return again to see how he listed his income in 2010. He listed NO wages in 2010.

So now we need to see his 99-02 returns. If he listed wages, he was still working at Bain. If theres no wages listed, then he was telling the truth about leaving the company.

that being said, he claims "Leave of absense" which could negate the whole thing if its a paid leave. That would be a perfectly reasonable explaination.

Jury is still out.

 

[EriktheRed]

For Romney to be truly off the hook politically for the stuff Bain was doing, he’d have to claim not lack of control, but lack of knowledge. And that’s just not going to wash with anyone. He could try going the “I didn’t have even the slightest idea what the company I technically still owned was doing” route, but he’d be marking himself as either dishonest or incompetent.

And yet that’s really his only out. Just a guess, but if, hypothetically speaking, he’d learned during the 1999-2002 stretch that Bain had made a practice of poisoning the water supply in a Midwestern factory town, he’d have severed all ties, legal and otherwise, with the company.

But that didn’t happen. More likely, Bain went on doing what it had always done, and with Romney’s tacit stamp of approval. So he owns it.

^^^^^

That.


Cutting Through The Bain Bamboozlement | TPM Editors Blog

For Romney to be truly off the hook politically for the stuff Bain was doing, he’d have to claim not lack of control, but lack of knowledge.

garbage.....

You can do better than that. How so?

 

[Darkwind]

Documents: Romney didn't manage Bain funds
By Dan Primack July 12, 2012: 2:41 PM ET

snip-

Bain Capital began circulating offering documents for its seventh private equity fund in June 2000. Those documents include several pages specifying fund management. The section begins:

Set forth below is information regarding the background of the senior private equity investment professionals of Bain Capital. Also listed are certain investment professionals responsible for the day-to-day affairs of the Brookside and Sankaty funds, which are affiliated funds of Fund VII.

It then goes on to list 18 managers of the private equity fund. Mitt Romney is not among them. Same goes for an affiliated co-investment fund, whose private placement memorandum is dated September 2000.

Then there is Bain Capital Venture Fund -- the firm's first dedicated venture capital effort -- whose private placement memorandum is dated January 2001. Romney also isn't listed among its "key investment professionals," or as part of its day-to-day operations or investment committee.

All of this could prove problematic for the Obama campaign, which has spent they day crowing over the Globe story (going so far as to hold a media call about it).

"When Mitt Romney ran for governor and now as he's running for president, he consistently claimed he could not be blamed for bankruptcies and layoffs from Bain investments after February 1999 because he departed for the Olympics," said Obama spokeswoman Stephanie Cutter, according to the Globe. "Now, we know that he wasn't telling the truth."

But the contemporaneous Bain documents show that Romney was indeed telling the truth about no longer having operational input at Bain -- which, one should note, is different from no longer having legal or financial ties to the firm.

more at-

Documents: Romney didn't manage Bain funds - The Term Sheet: Fortune's deals blog Term Sheet

This should end the entire thread.

$5 spot says it will be ignored. (meaning it will not be addressed point by point with truth)

 

[Lakhota]

If Romney ends up dropping out due to ethical problems, who is next in line? Ron Paul? Gingrich?

Wingnuts knew Romney was a flawed candidate from the very beginning. He was a vulture capitalist and a lousy governor.

 

[Sallow]

Documents: Romney didn't manage Bain funds
By Dan Primack July 12, 2012: 2:41 PM ET

snip-

Bain Capital began circulating offering documents for its seventh private equity fund in June 2000. Those documents include several pages specifying fund management. The section begins:

Set forth below is information regarding the background of the senior private equity investment professionals of Bain Capital. Also listed are certain investment professionals responsible for the day-to-day affairs of the Brookside and Sankaty funds, which are affiliated funds of Fund VII.

It then goes on to list 18 managers of the private equity fund. Mitt Romney is not among them. Same goes for an affiliated co-investment fund, whose private placement memorandum is dated September 2000.

Then there is Bain Capital Venture Fund -- the firm's first dedicated venture capital effort -- whose private placement memorandum is dated January 2001. Romney also isn't listed among its "key investment professionals," or as part of its day-to-day operations or investment committee.

All of this could prove problematic for the Obama campaign, which has spent they day crowing over the Globe story (going so far as to hold a media call about it).

"When Mitt Romney ran for governor and now as he's running for president, he consistently claimed he could not be blamed for bankruptcies and layoffs from Bain investments after February 1999 because he departed for the Olympics," said Obama spokeswoman Stephanie Cutter, according to the Globe. "Now, we know that he wasn't telling the truth."

But the contemporaneous Bain documents show that Romney was indeed telling the truth about no longer having operational input at Bain -- which, one should note, is different from no longer having legal or financial ties to the firm.

more at-

Documents: Romney didn't manage Bain funds - The Term Sheet: Fortune's deals blog Term Sheet

Erm..

According to a statement issued by Bain Wednesday, “Mitt Romney retired from Bain Capital in February 1999. He has had no involvement in the management or investment activities of Bain Capital, or with any of its portfolio companies, since that time.”


A former SEC commissioner told the Globe that the SEC documents listing Romney as Bain’s chief executive between 1999 and 2002 cannot be dismissed so easily.


“You can’t say statements filed with the SEC are meaningless. This is a fact in an SEC filing,” said Roberta S. Karmel, now a professor at Brooklyn Law School.


“It doesn’t make a whole lot of sense to say he was technically in charge on paper but he had nothing to do with Bain’s operations,” Karmel continued. “Was he getting paid? He’s the sole stockholder. Are you telling me he owned the company but had no say in its investments?”


The Globe found nine SEC filings submitted by four different business entities after February 1999 that describe Romney as Bain Capital’s boss; some show him with managerial control over five Bain Capital entities that were formed in January 2002, according to records in Delaware, where they were incorporated.


A Romney campaign official, who requested anonymity to discuss the SEC filings, acknowledged that they “do not square with common sense.” But SEC regulations are complicated and quirky, the official argued, and Romney’s signature on some documents after his exit does not indicate active involvement in the firm.


A spokesman for the SEC said the commission could not comment on individual company filings or address the meaning of Romney’s name and title on the documents.


Karmel, the former SEC commissioner, said the contradictory statements could have legal implications in some instances.


“If someone invested with Bain Capital because they believed Mitt Romney was a great fund manager, and it turns out he wasn’t really doing anything, that could be considered a misrepresentation to the investor,’’ she said. “It’s a theory that could be used in a lawsuit against him.”
Government documents indicate Mitt Romney continued at Bain after date when he says he left - The Boston Globe

 

[Si modo]

That isn't the year in question.

He should release the returns from 1999 -2002.

That's the year the poster asked for.

Why do you want those other returns?

I asked for that one because its the ONLY one Romney has thus far released.

I wanted to look at the return again to see how he listed his income in 2010. He listed NO wages in 2010.

So now we need to see his 99-02 returns. If he listed wages, he was still working at Bain. If theres no wages listed, then he was telling the truth about leaving the company.

that being said, he claims "Leave of absense" which could negate the whole thing if its a paid leave. That would be a perfectly reasonable explaination.

Jury is still out.

The link is his entire return, schedules and all. No wages.

 

[hjmick]

Documents: Romney didn't manage Bain funds
By Dan Primack July 12, 2012: 2:41 PM ET

snip-

Bain Capital began circulating offering documents for its seventh private equity fund in June 2000. Those documents include several pages specifying fund management. The section begins:

Set forth below is information regarding the background of the senior private equity investment professionals of Bain Capital. Also listed are certain investment professionals responsible for the day-to-day affairs of the Brookside and Sankaty funds, which are affiliated funds of Fund VII.

It then goes on to list 18 managers of the private equity fund. Mitt Romney is not among them. Same goes for an affiliated co-investment fund, whose private placement memorandum is dated September 2000.

Then there is Bain Capital Venture Fund -- the firm's first dedicated venture capital effort -- whose private placement memorandum is dated January 2001. Romney also isn't listed among its "key investment professionals," or as part of its day-to-day operations or investment committee.

All of this could prove problematic for the Obama campaign, which has spent they day crowing over the Globe story (going so far as to hold a media call about it).

"When Mitt Romney ran for governor and now as he's running for president, he consistently claimed he could not be blamed for bankruptcies and layoffs from Bain investments after February 1999 because he departed for the Olympics," said Obama spokeswoman Stephanie Cutter, according to the Globe. "Now, we know that he wasn't telling the truth."

But the contemporaneous Bain documents show that Romney was indeed telling the truth about no longer having operational input at Bain -- which, one should note, is different from no longer having legal or financial ties to the firm.

more at-

Documents: Romney didn't manage Bain funds - The Term Sheet: Fortune's deals blog Term Sheet

This should end the entire thread.

$5 spot says it will be ignored. (meaning it will not be addressed point by point with truth)

No bet.

 

[Si modo]

Documents: Romney didn't manage Bain funds
By Dan Primack July 12, 2012: 2:41 PM ET

snip-

Bain Capital began circulating offering documents for its seventh private equity fund in June 2000. Those documents include several pages specifying fund management. The section begins:

Set forth below is information regarding the background of the senior private equity investment professionals of Bain Capital. Also listed are certain investment professionals responsible for the day-to-day affairs of the Brookside and Sankaty funds, which are affiliated funds of Fund VII.

It then goes on to list 18 managers of the private equity fund. Mitt Romney is not among them. Same goes for an affiliated co-investment fund, whose private placement memorandum is dated September 2000.

Then there is Bain Capital Venture Fund -- the firm's first dedicated venture capital effort -- whose private placement memorandum is dated January 2001. Romney also isn't listed among its "key investment professionals," or as part of its day-to-day operations or investment committee.

All of this could prove problematic for the Obama campaign, which has spent they day crowing over the Globe story (going so far as to hold a media call about it).

"When Mitt Romney ran for governor and now as he's running for president, he consistently claimed he could not be blamed for bankruptcies and layoffs from Bain investments after February 1999 because he departed for the Olympics," said Obama spokeswoman Stephanie Cutter, according to the Globe. "Now, we know that he wasn't telling the truth."

But the contemporaneous Bain documents show that Romney was indeed telling the truth about no longer having operational input at Bain -- which, one should note, is different from no longer having legal or financial ties to the firm.

more at-

Documents: Romney didn't manage Bain funds - The Term Sheet: Fortune's deals blog Term Sheet

Erm..

According to a statement issued by Bain Wednesday, “Mitt Romney retired from Bain Capital in February 1999. He has had no involvement in the management or investment activities of Bain Capital, or with any of its portfolio companies, since that time.”


A former SEC commissioner told the Globe that the SEC documents listing Romney as Bain’s chief executive between 1999 and 2002 cannot be dismissed so easily.


“You can’t say statements filed with the SEC are meaningless. This is a fact in an SEC filing,” said Roberta S. Karmel, now a professor at Brooklyn Law School.


“It doesn’t make a whole lot of sense to say he was technically in charge on paper but he had nothing to do with Bain’s operations,” Karmel continued. “Was he getting paid? He’s the sole stockholder. Are you telling me he owned the company but had no say in its investments?”


The Globe found nine SEC filings submitted by four different business entities after February 1999 that describe Romney as Bain Capital’s boss; some show him with managerial control over five Bain Capital entities that were formed in January 2002, according to records in Delaware, where they were incorporated.


A Romney campaign official, who requested anonymity to discuss the SEC filings, acknowledged that they “do not square with common sense.” But SEC regulations are complicated and quirky, the official argued, and Romney’s signature on some documents after his exit does not indicate active involvement in the firm.


A spokesman for the SEC said the commission could not comment on individual company filings or address the meaning of Romney’s name and title on the documents.


Karmel, the former SEC commissioner, said the contradictory statements could have legal implications in some instances.


“If someone invested with Bain Capital because they believed Mitt Romney was a great fund manager, and it turns out he wasn’t really doing anything, that could be considered a misrepresentation to the investor,’’ she said. “It’s a theory that could be used in a lawsuit against him.”
Government documents indicate Mitt Romney continued at Bain after date when he says he left - The Boston Globe

So, what is the issue?

 

[Trajan]

^^^^^

That.


Cutting Through The Bain Bamboozlement | TPM Editors Blog

For Romney to be truly off the hook politically for the stuff Bain was doing, he’d have to claim not lack of control, but lack of knowledge.

garbage.....

You can do better than that. How so?

its simple, a critical thinking exercise; if he is on leave, why would knowledge be of any help or matter?

 

[rdean]

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.

It should be noted that David Corn broke this story a few weeks ago in a great piece everyone should read, though the Globe appears to have found additional disclosure forms to back up their case.

If the Obama campaign is correct [that Romney remained at Bain past 1999], then Romney is guilty of lying on official federal disclosure forms, committing a felony.

Making false statements to the federal government is a serious crime (under 18 USC 1001) carrying possible fines and up to five years in federal prison.

1. Romney told the SEC that he remained the firm’s "sole stockholder, chairman of the board, chief executive officer, and president" up until 2002.

2. But Romney said in a more recent financial disclosure form that he left Bain in 1999 - so the two federal forms contradict each other, at least one is a lie:

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-2011-title18/pdf/USCODE-2011-title18-partI-chap47-sec1001.pdf

US Politics | Romney may have committed felony lying about role with Bain

Somebody is in deep Mitt. This is a story that won't go away.

Romney's lies are like the "boy who cried wolf". Eventually, no one would believe him. In Romney's case, it's worse, they've started really looking at what he said.

 

[Lakhota]

Mitt Romney's Own 2002 Testimony Undermines Bain Departure Claim

 

[EriktheRed]

Documents: Romney didn't manage Bain funds
By Dan Primack July 12, 2012: 2:41 PM ET

snip-

Bain Capital began circulating offering documents for its seventh private equity fund in June 2000. Those documents include several pages specifying fund management. The section begins:

Set forth below is information regarding the background of the senior private equity investment professionals of Bain Capital. Also listed are certain investment professionals responsible for the day-to-day affairs of the Brookside and Sankaty funds, which are affiliated funds of Fund VII.

It then goes on to list 18 managers of the private equity fund. Mitt Romney is not among them. Same goes for an affiliated co-investment fund, whose private placement memorandum is dated September 2000.

Then there is Bain Capital Venture Fund -- the firm's first dedicated venture capital effort -- whose private placement memorandum is dated January 2001. Romney also isn't listed among its "key investment professionals," or as part of its day-to-day operations or investment committee.

All of this could prove problematic for the Obama campaign, which has spent they day crowing over the Globe story (going so far as to hold a media call about it).

"When Mitt Romney ran for governor and now as he's running for president, he consistently claimed he could not be blamed for bankruptcies and layoffs from Bain investments after February 1999 because he departed for the Olympics," said Obama spokeswoman Stephanie Cutter, according to the Globe. "Now, we know that he wasn't telling the truth."

But the contemporaneous Bain documents show that Romney was indeed telling the truth about no longer having operational input at Bain -- which, one should note, is different from no longer having legal or financial ties to the firm.

more at-

Documents: Romney didn't manage Bain funds - The Term Sheet: Fortune's deals blog Term Sheet

Erm..

According to a statement issued by Bain Wednesday, “Mitt Romney retired from Bain Capital in February 1999. He has had no involvement in the management or investment activities of Bain Capital, or with any of its portfolio companies, since that time.”


A former SEC commissioner told the Globe that the SEC documents listing Romney as Bain’s chief executive between 1999 and 2002 cannot be dismissed so easily.


“You can’t say statements filed with the SEC are meaningless. This is a fact in an SEC filing,” said Roberta S. Karmel, now a professor at Brooklyn Law School.


“It doesn’t make a whole lot of sense to say he was technically in charge on paper but he had nothing to do with Bain’s operations,” Karmel continued. “Was he getting paid? He’s the sole stockholder. Are you telling me he owned the company but had no say in its investments?”


The Globe found nine SEC filings submitted by four different business entities after February 1999 that describe Romney as Bain Capital’s boss; some show him with managerial control over five Bain Capital entities that were formed in January 2002, according to records in Delaware, where they were incorporated.


A Romney campaign official, who requested anonymity to discuss the SEC filings, acknowledged that they “do not square with common sense.” But SEC regulations are complicated and quirky, the official argued, and Romney’s signature on some documents after his exit does not indicate active involvement in the firm.


A spokesman for the SEC said the commission could not comment on individual company filings or address the meaning of Romney’s name and title on the documents.


Karmel, the former SEC commissioner, said the contradictory statements could have legal implications in some instances.


“If someone invested with Bain Capital because they believed Mitt Romney was a great fund manager, and it turns out he wasn’t really doing anything, that could be considered a misrepresentation to the investor,’’ she said. “It’s a theory that could be used in a lawsuit against him.”
Government documents indicate Mitt Romney continued at Bain after date when he says he left - The Boston Globe

And did Mr. Romney also not know what the company he owned - but supposedly wasn't running - was doing during those few years he supposedly wasn't there?

 

[Trajan]

Documents: Romney didn't manage Bain funds
By Dan Primack July 12, 2012: 2:41 PM ET

snip-

Bain Capital began circulating offering documents for its seventh private equity fund in June 2000. Those documents include several pages specifying fund management. The section begins:

Set forth below is information regarding the background of the senior private equity investment professionals of Bain Capital. Also listed are certain investment professionals responsible for the day-to-day affairs of the Brookside and Sankaty funds, which are affiliated funds of Fund VII.

It then goes on to list 18 managers of the private equity fund. Mitt Romney is not among them. Same goes for an affiliated co-investment fund, whose private placement memorandum is dated September 2000.

Then there is Bain Capital Venture Fund -- the firm's first dedicated venture capital effort -- whose private placement memorandum is dated January 2001. Romney also isn't listed among its "key investment professionals," or as part of its day-to-day operations or investment committee.

All of this could prove problematic for the Obama campaign, which has spent they day crowing over the Globe story (going so far as to hold a media call about it).

"When Mitt Romney ran for governor and now as he's running for president, he consistently claimed he could not be blamed for bankruptcies and layoffs from Bain investments after February 1999 because he departed for the Olympics," said Obama spokeswoman Stephanie Cutter, according to the Globe. "Now, we know that he wasn't telling the truth."

But the contemporaneous Bain documents show that Romney was indeed telling the truth about no longer having operational input at Bain -- which, one should note, is different from no longer having legal or financial ties to the firm.

more at-

Documents: Romney didn't manage Bain funds - The Term Sheet: Fortune's deals blog Term Sheet

Erm..

According to a statement issued by Bain Wednesday, “Mitt Romney retired from Bain Capital in February 1999. He has had no involvement in the management or investment activities of Bain Capital, or with any of its portfolio companies, since that time.”


A former SEC commissioner told the Globe that the SEC documents listing Romney as Bain’s chief executive between 1999 and 2002 cannot be dismissed so easily.


“You can’t say statements filed with the SEC are meaningless. This is a fact in an SEC filing,” said Roberta S. Karmel, now a professor at Brooklyn Law School.


“It doesn’t make a whole lot of sense to say he was technically in charge on paper but he had nothing to do with Bain’s operations,” Karmel continued. “Was he getting paid? He’s the sole stockholder. Are you telling me he owned the company but had no say in its investments?”


The Globe found nine SEC filings submitted by four different business entities after February 1999 that describe Romney as Bain Capital’s boss; some show him with managerial control over five Bain Capital entities that were formed in January 2002, according to records in Delaware, where they were incorporated.


A Romney campaign official, who requested anonymity to discuss the SEC filings, acknowledged that they “do not square with common sense.” But SEC regulations are complicated and quirky, the official argued, and Romney’s signature on some documents after his exit does not indicate active involvement in the firm.


A spokesman for the SEC said the commission could not comment on individual company filings or address the meaning of Romney’s name and title on the documents.


Karmel, the former SEC commissioner, said the contradictory statements could have legal implications in some instances.


“If someone invested with Bain Capital because they believed Mitt Romney was a great fund manager, and it turns out he wasn’t really doing anything, that could be considered a misrepresentation to the investor,’’ she said. “It’s a theory that could be used in a lawsuit against him.”
Government documents indicate Mitt Romney continued at Bain after date when he says he left - The Boston Globe

So, what is the issue?

politics......... and an admin. that has nothing to run on but fear & loathing, minus Vegas..

 

[Si modo]

Mitt Romney's Own 2002 Testimony Undermines Bain Departure Claim

No, it doesn't.

 

[Trajan]

Documents: Romney didn't manage Bain funds
By Dan Primack July 12, 2012: 2:41 PM ET

snip-

Bain Capital began circulating offering documents for its seventh private equity fund in June 2000. Those documents include several pages specifying fund management. The section begins:

Set forth below is information regarding the background of the senior private equity investment professionals of Bain Capital. Also listed are certain investment professionals responsible for the day-to-day affairs of the Brookside and Sankaty funds, which are affiliated funds of Fund VII.

It then goes on to list 18 managers of the private equity fund. Mitt Romney is not among them. Same goes for an affiliated co-investment fund, whose private placement memorandum is dated September 2000.

Then there is Bain Capital Venture Fund -- the firm's first dedicated venture capital effort -- whose private placement memorandum is dated January 2001. Romney also isn't listed among its "key investment professionals," or as part of its day-to-day operations or investment committee.

All of this could prove problematic for the Obama campaign, which has spent they day crowing over the Globe story (going so far as to hold a media call about it).

"When Mitt Romney ran for governor and now as he's running for president, he consistently claimed he could not be blamed for bankruptcies and layoffs from Bain investments after February 1999 because he departed for the Olympics," said Obama spokeswoman Stephanie Cutter, according to the Globe. "Now, we know that he wasn't telling the truth."

But the contemporaneous Bain documents show that Romney was indeed telling the truth about no longer having operational input at Bain -- which, one should note, is different from no longer having legal or financial ties to the firm.

more at-

Documents: Romney didn't manage Bain funds - The Term Sheet: Fortune's deals blog Term Sheet

Erm..

According to a statement issued by Bain Wednesday, “Mitt Romney retired from Bain Capital in February 1999. He has had no involvement in the management or investment activities of Bain Capital, or with any of its portfolio companies, since that time.”


A former SEC commissioner told the Globe that the SEC documents listing Romney as Bain’s chief executive between 1999 and 2002 cannot be dismissed so easily.


“You can’t say statements filed with the SEC are meaningless. This is a fact in an SEC filing,” said Roberta S. Karmel, now a professor at Brooklyn Law School.


“It doesn’t make a whole lot of sense to say he was technically in charge on paper but he had nothing to do with Bain’s operations,” Karmel continued. “Was he getting paid? He’s the sole stockholder. Are you telling me he owned the company but had no say in its investments?”


The Globe found nine SEC filings submitted by four different business entities after February 1999 that describe Romney as Bain Capital’s boss; some show him with managerial control over five Bain Capital entities that were formed in January 2002, according to records in Delaware, where they were incorporated.


A Romney campaign official, who requested anonymity to discuss the SEC filings, acknowledged that they “do not square with common sense.” But SEC regulations are complicated and quirky, the official argued, and Romney’s signature on some documents after his exit does not indicate active involvement in the firm.


A spokesman for the SEC said the commission could not comment on individual company filings or address the meaning of Romney’s name and title on the documents.


Karmel, the former SEC commissioner, said the contradictory statements could have legal implications in some instances.


“If someone invested with Bain Capital because they believed Mitt Romney was a great fund manager, and it turns out he wasn’t really doing anything, that could be considered a misrepresentation to the investor,’’ she said. “It’s a theory that could be used in a lawsuit against him.”
Government documents indicate Mitt Romney continued at Bain after date when he says he left - The Boston Globe

And did Mr. Romney also not know what the company he owned - but supposedly wasn't running - was doing during those few years he supposedly wasn't there?

see post 453, its a dead end.

 

[Si modo]

Erm..

So, what is the issue?

politics......... and an admin. that has nothing to run on but fear & loathing, minus Vegas..

I am really trying to see what part of this would get anyone's knickers in a knot.

Amazing.

There is absolutely NOTHING.

And, now Obama better eat some crow for that felony crack.