rMoney commits felony

[Phatscotty]

Nobody really gives a F about Bain, just like many don't give a shit about Haliburton anymore. It's a losing talking point

Lol. Let me translate this for everybody:

It's completely true. It's horribly damaging. We have no way to refute it. Hopefully it'll just go away and people will stop talking about it.

What I meant was to look at Haliburton. I know you remember how everybody thought it was the devil, and it was mentioned on the news all the time, and the company is evil and Dick Cheney was granting no-bid contracts to his buddies etc etc. So, did Haliburton go out of business? Did they stop getting no-bid contracts from the federal government? No, Haliburton is sitll there doing exactly what it has always done, but now nobody could give a shit less.

[bedub1]

Nobody really gives a F about Bain, just like many don't give a shit about Haliburton anymore. It's a losing talking point

Lol. Let me translate this for everybody:

It's completely true. It's horribly damaging. We have no way to refute it. Hopefully it'll just go away and people will stop talking about it.

What I meant was to look at Haliburton. I know you remember how everybody thought it was the devil, and it was mentioned on the news all the time, and the company is evil and Dick Cheney was granting no-bid contracts to his buddies etc etc. So, did Haliburton go out of business? Did they stop getting no-bid contracts from the federal government? No, Haliburton is sitll there doing exactly what it has always done, but now nobody could give a shit less.

Nobody gives a shit about Bain Capital. They care about a presidential candidate committing a felony and lying. They care about him shipping jobs overseas.

[Night Strike]

Nobody gives a shit about Bain Capital. They care about a presidential candidate committing a felony and lying. They care about him shipping jobs overseas.

Except Romney hasn't done any of those things. Every single one of those accusations have been debunked by liberal publications.

[Symmetry]

The gist of his big media interviews today is explained thus:

Mitt Romney on Friday night demanded an apology from President Obama for making what he called “reckless” and “absurd” allegations about his record while repeating his insistence that he left Bain Capital in 1999 to run the Olympics.

He then attacked the president personally:

“What kind of a president would have a campaign that says something like that about the nominee of another party?” Mr. Romney asked during a brief interview with CBS News. Earlier, on CNN, Mr. Romney called the accusation of criminal behavior — which came on Thursday from Mr. Obama’s deputy campaign manager — “disgusting” and “demeaning” and said it was destructive to the political process.

“It’s something that I think the president should take responsibility for and stop it,” Mr. Romney said.

This is another lurch downward for Romney in this cycle, I'd say. For a simple reason. We have documentary proof that Romney told the SEC he was CEO of Bain through 2002, and that he drew a salary of more than $100,000 for doing that job. So was he telling the truth on television today when he insisted that “I left any responsibility whatsoever, any effort, any involvement whatsoever in the management of Bain Capital after February of 1999” - or when the company he solely owned filed with the SEC, and when Bain itself called him the CEO in July 1999, and when he testified under oath in 2002 that he was involved in many business and board meetings of Bain companies in the period in question?

To put it more succinctly: how does this statement

[T]here were a number of social trips and business trips that brought me back to Massachusetts, board meetings, Thanksgiving and so forth... [I] remained on the board of the Staples Corporation and Marriott International, the LifeLike Corporation [all Bain companies]

and this excerpt from a press release from Bain in July 1999:

Bain Capital CEO W. Mitt Romney, currently on a part-time leave of absence to head the Salt Lake City Olympic Committee for the 2002 Games said ...

jibe with this one today:

“I left any responsibility whatsoever, any effort, any involvement whatsoever in the management of Bain Capital after February of 1999 ... I went on to run the Olympics for three years I was there full time after that I came back and ran in Massachusetts for governor. I had no role with regards to Bain Capital after February 1999.

and this recent statement from Bain itself, declaring Romney had:

"absolutely no involvement with the management or investment activities of the firm or with any of its portfolio companies."

My italics. He had "no role with regards to" Bain Capital after February 1999 (a very broad statement) - except for being the CEO, and repeatedly returning to Massachusetts for board meetings of Bain-owned companies, which he "attended by telephone if I could not return".

A false SEC filing is a serious offense; to say so is not disgusting. So is potential perjury in 2002 when Romney detailed his continued involvement in Bain-owned enterprises in the period he retained the CEO title and now says he had nothing whatsoever to do with Bain. The SEC filing rules apply to everyone - except, it seems, to Romney, and his well-paid legal and accounting team. They may have so internalized this immunity from any accountability that Romney may indeed genuinely feel disgusted by being called to follow the normal rules, or called out on logical inconsistencies.

I'm getting the feeling that Romney thinks he is above the level of accountability required in a presidential candidate or even in an average ethical businessman. He seems genuinely offended to be directly challenged with facts - which he still won't address or rebut in detail. So he simply huffs and puffs and uses words like "disgusting" for a perfectly valid charge in the big boy world of presidential politics.

This does not seem to me to be like a candidate ready for prime time.

Andrew Sullivan- The Daily Beast

[Night Strike]

Just curious to those liberals who want to keep pushing this "story", considering this was originally published by the Boston Globe (the ones who "broke" it this week) in 2002, why was it never brought up in the primary? We saw Gingrich putting up some extremely harsh and low attacks on Romney during the campaign, but none of this was never mentioned. It would have been plastered everywhere during the primary if there was truth to it.

[Symmetry]

Just curious to those liberals who want to keep pushing this "story", considering this was originally published by the Boston Globe (the ones who "broke" it this week) in 2002, why was it never brought up in the primary? We saw Gingrich putting up some extremely harsh and low attacks on Romney during the campaign, but none of this was never mentioned. It would have been plastered everywhere during the primary if there was truth to it.

Running for President brings a greater degree of scrutiny? Or are you saying that it shouldn't, or doesn't?

[Night Strike]

Just curious to those liberals who want to keep pushing this "story", considering this was originally published by the Boston Globe (the ones who "broke" it this week) in 2002, why was it never brought up in the primary? We saw Gingrich putting up some extremely harsh and low attacks on Romney during the campaign, but none of this was never mentioned. It would have been plastered everywhere during the primary if there was truth to it.

Running for President brings a greater degree of scrutiny? Or are you saying that it shouldn't, or doesn't?

I know you're British yet still like to comment on all things American-politics, but running in the presidential primary IS running for president.

[Symmetry]

Just curious to those liberals who want to keep pushing this "story", considering this was originally published by the Boston Globe (the ones who "broke" it this week) in 2002, why was it never brought up in the primary? We saw Gingrich putting up some extremely harsh and low attacks on Romney during the campaign, but none of this was never mentioned. It would have been plastered everywhere during the primary if there was truth to it.

Running for President brings a greater degree of scrutiny? Or are you saying that it shouldn't, or doesn't?

I know you're British yet still like to comment on all things American-politics, but running in the presidential primary IS running for president.

Lol, like anyone thought Gary Johnson was really in the running for President when he was running in the primary and deserved scrutiny.

Maybe it's just me being British, but I'm pretty sure that even the Repubs didn't consider him a serious candidate worthy of actually taking part in the early debates.

You willing to talk about the Romney stuff now? Or would you like to deflect a bit more until Fox comes on and tells you how to tow the party line.

'cause there's only so often you can say "na-uh", blame Obama, or attack other posters before people notice that you haven't really been addressing the problem with Willard.

[Night Strike]

Just curious to those liberals who want to keep pushing this "story", considering this was originally published by the Boston Globe (the ones who "broke" it this week) in 2002, why was it never brought up in the primary? We saw Gingrich putting up some extremely harsh and low attacks on Romney during the campaign, but none of this was never mentioned. It would have been plastered everywhere during the primary if there was truth to it.

Running for President brings a greater degree of scrutiny? Or are you saying that it shouldn't, or doesn't?

I know you're British yet still like to comment on all things American-politics, but running in the presidential primary IS running for president.

Lol, like anyone thought Gary Johnson was really in the running for President when he was running in the primary and deserved scrutiny.

Some people have no chance yet run to further their personal brand. For the record, Johnson is now running as the libertarian candidate for president.

[Symmetry]

Just curious to those liberals who want to keep pushing this "story", considering this was originally published by the Boston Globe (the ones who "broke" it this week) in 2002, why was it never brought up in the primary? We saw Gingrich putting up some extremely harsh and low attacks on Romney during the campaign, but none of this was never mentioned. It would have been plastered everywhere during the primary if there was truth to it.

Running for President brings a greater degree of scrutiny? Or are you saying that it shouldn't, or doesn't?

I know you're British yet still like to comment on all things American-politics, but running in the presidential primary IS running for president.

Lol, like anyone thought Gary Johnson was really in the running for President when he was running in the primary and deserved scrutiny.

Some people have no chance yet run to further their personal brand. For the record, Johnson is now running as the libertarian candidate for president.

Nobody cares. Stop deflecting.

[Phatscotty]

Romney is demanding an apology from Obama for calling him a felon. Will Obama apologize?

and Bedub why are you pumping Obama lies? What I don't get about this one, even if Romney was with Bain until 2002, wtf does that prove????? I can't believe the Obama campaign can't do any better than this! On the other hand I do not blame him, because it's apparent this kind of complete BS in a non-issue actually does work on a certain amount of people.

[Night Strike]

LOL.....troll hard? I have directly answered everything in this thread, including the actual allegations brought forth by the Obama administration and debunked in both 2002 and January 2012.

[Symmetry]

Romney is demanding an apology from Obama for calling him a felon. Will Obama apologize?

Already addressed-

Here

Do read a bit of the thread, you might be surprised to find some interesting arguments.

[Phatscotty]

Just curious to those liberals who want to keep pushing this "story", considering this was originally published by the Boston Globe (the ones who "broke" it this week) in 2002, why was it never brought up in the primary? We saw Gingrich putting up some extremely harsh and low attacks on Romney during the campaign, but none of this was never mentioned. It would have been plastered everywhere during the primary if there was truth to it.

It doesn't matter anything it's true or not. All that matters is if it works on the clueless.

With Obama, the ends ALWAYS justify the means.

[Symmetry]

ITT, Scotty and NS do their very best to stop anyone talking about Romney.

[Phatscotty]

ITT, Scotty and NS do their very best to stop anyone talking about Romney.

and....a lie is a lie

[Night Strike]

ITT, Scotty and NS do their very best to stop anyone talking about Romney.

You can talk about Romney all you want, just make sure you're dealing in facts. These accusations about Romney breaking the law were debunked in both 2002 and January 2012, way before the Obama campaign decided to trump it up.

[Symmetry]

ITT, Scotty and NS do their very best to stop anyone talking about Romney.

and....a lie is a lie

Thanks for getting back on topic- I agree that Romney clearly lied, and it's kind of frustrating that NS is holding out on accepting that too. It's possible for him to support a candidate who ain't a saint, but like you said,

a lie is a lie.

[Night Strike]

ITT, Scotty and NS do their very best to stop anyone talking about Romney.

and....a lie is a lie

Thanks for getting back on topic- I agree that Romney clearly lied, and it's kind of frustrating that NS is holding out on accepting that too. It's possible for him to support a candidate who ain't a saint, but like you said,

a lie is a lie.

You're delusional.

I clearly posted articles from liberal sources that debunked these accusations. You have yet to rationally disagree with those sources.

[Night Strike]

Speaking of liars though, it appears that Obama may finally start admitting that his Obamacare mandate IS in fact a massive tax: http://www.theblaze.com/stories/obama-describes-individual-mandate-as-a-tax/

[Symmetry]

ITT, Scotty and NS do their very best to stop anyone talking about Romney.

and....a lie is a lie

Thanks for getting back on topic- I agree that Romney clearly lied, and it's kind of frustrating that NS is holding out on accepting that too. It's possible for him to support a candidate who ain't a saint, but like you said,

a lie is a lie.

You're delusional.

I clearly posted articles from liberal sources that debunked these accusations. You have yet to rationally disagree with those sources.

Whether the sources are liberal, or conservative has little relevance to me outside of their truth. I've posted a conservative link that you've not responded to, and seem to be doing your best to ignore.

I'm sorry that you seem to consider ":lol: You're delusional." as rational disagreement, or that you consider the issue as being liberal vs conservative on a potentially criminal matter, but that says more about your attitude to this issue than it does about me.

[Phatscotty]

ITT, Scotty and NS do their very best to stop anyone talking about Romney.

and....a lie is a lie

Thanks for getting back on topic- I agree that Romney clearly lied, and it's kind of frustrating that NS is holding out on accepting that too. It's possible for him to support a candidate who ain't a saint, but like you said,

a lie is a lie.

and...... a troll is a troll! Romney even has Democrats backing him on this, and it's a lot more than just a few. This issue is not about taking sides, or trolls trying to paint pictures that do not exist. This issue is about the truth.

My respect goes to all the Democrats of honor, for doing the right thing, and for rising above the opportunity to throw mud and enable, aid, and create an environment of slime. Obama's campaign calling Mitt Romney a felon is just the start of Obama Inc.

Obama will prove to be the dirtiest player in the game, and this attack from Obama Inc. is piss poor pathetic. What a deusche

[Symmetry]

Future ITT prediction:

Nightstrike will attempt to rationalise his two radically conflicting viewpoints that this is both old news from 2002 not worth discsussing, and also a recent smear campaign by Obama in 2012.

Whatever gets the job done, I guess.

[Phatscotty]

Future ITT prediction:

Nightstrike will attempt to rationalise his two radically conflicting viewpoints that this is both old news from 2002 not worth discsussing, and also a recent smear campaign by Obama in 2012.

Whatever gets the job done, I guess.

there aren't radically conflicting viewpoints. There are Republicans and Democrats coming together to speak the truth, that Romney took over the Olympics in 1999, which is a fact.

Obama's and your side is not a conflicting view, they are just a bunch of lying cheaters.

[Juan_Bottom]

Just curious to those liberals who want to keep pushing this "story", considering this was originally published by the Boston Globe (the ones who "broke" it this week) in 2002, why was it never brought up in the primary? We saw Gingrich putting up some extremely harsh and low attacks on Romney during the campaign, but none of this was never mentioned. It would have been plastered everywhere during the primary if there was truth to it.

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/07/13 ... -a-felony/

“Ten years ago, when I ran against Mitt Romney for Governor, my campaign was attacked for misstating the truth about Romney’s tenure at Bain Capital. Massachusetts voters were told that Romney was absolutely not the leader of Bain at a time when bankruptcies and layoffs were devastating workers at companies in their portfolio,” [Shannon] O’Brien told HuffPost in an email. “Recent news stories now present clear evidence that Mitt Romney didn’t tell the truth to Massachusetts when he ran for Governor in 2002 and he’s not telling the truth to the American people today.”

^^^This is the answer to your question I think. It's because last time this came up in a race, it backfired. And it didn't backfire because O'Brien was wrong.

New Document:

But in his 2002 disclosure statement, he provided a different answer, listing himself as “Executive” of Bain Capital Inc. and Bain Capital LLC, with a gross income of more than $100,000.